Found in 17 comments
by cr0sh
2017-08-02
In addition to all that has been said, if you really want to understand what Logo is, what it teaches, why, etc - then you need to read about it from the man who invented it:

http://www.papert.org/

Want to know why Lego Mindstorms exists? Well...

https://www.amazon.com/Mindstorms-Children-Computers-Powerfu...

That's the work you need to read - but really, learn about the man, learn about Logo. As others have noted, it's more than just turtle graphics - so much more. Unfortunately, educators still have not grasped his ideas fully, and if you look closely, what is often touted out there for teaching children and others programming - is essentially his ideas, reimplemented poorly.

He has written more on the subject than that one book; and his thoughts and ideas (and Logo itself) aren't really about teaching children programming, but teaching children how to think computationally, algorithmically. He saw how and where things were heading long before many others, and he worked to try to get people prepared. Sadly, all people grasped was turtle graphics, but not the larger picture.

I often wonder where we'd be today had more people truly understood and implemented his (and, to be honest, his "muse" / "mentor" / "inspiration", if you will, in Piaget) methods and thoughts on teaching. Most likely in a much better position as a society...


Original thread
by wallflower
2017-05-05
The beauty of Scratch and other similar tools is that instead of the teacher asking questions, the child learns to ask their own questions.

If you are interested in learning more about this mindset, you should read Mindstorms by Seymour Papert (RIP).

https://www.amazon.com/Mindstorms-Children-Computers-Powerfu...

Scratch can be a "gateway drug" to languages that professional programmers use. The extensions/abstractions of Scratch from Berkeley that deal with making it do complicated things seem like putting a fish on a bicycle. Sometimes, you just have to leap and try to not fall.


Original thread
by kbouck
2016-12-08
That would be amazing considering his relation to Seymour Papert [1], who:

- Co-invented Logo Programming language

- Authored "Mindstorms" [1]

- Collaborated with Lego to produce (Logo-programmable) Lego Mindstorms.

- Was made co-director of the MIT AI Lab by...... Marvin Minsky

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seymour_Papert

[2] https://www.amazon.com/Mindstorms-Children-Computers-Powerfu...


Original thread
by oulipo
2016-08-01
Seymour Papert was an inspiring and caring researcher, and he will inspire many generations to come. His work was truly groundbreaking, subtle and profound, and I encourage everyone to read some of his books, notably Mindstorm and Children's Machine

https://www.amazon.com/Mindstorms-Children-Computers-Powerfu...

https://www.amazon.com/Childrens-Machine-Rethinking-School-C...


Original thread
by csours
2015-03-16
Putting aside all the ad-hominem and everything-is-terrible, I think I learned a lot from following the references Tef makes in this talk.

Some references (sorry for the formatting, if this becomes a thing I'll do the wiki and the logo):

Slides:

https://github.com/tef/emfcamp2012/raw/master/programming_is...

Blub Paradox:

http://www.paulgraham.com/avg.html

http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?BlubParadox

Perl and 9/11:

http://www.paulgraham.com/hijack.html

10x:

http://hfs.sagepub.com/content/16/1/70.short

http://www.construx.com/10x_Software_Development/Origins_of_...

http://www.construx.com/10x_Software_Development/Productivit...

Waterfall (same pdf, linking from 2 sources):

http://www.cs.umd.edu/class/spring2003/cmsc838p/Process/wate...

http://leadinganswers.typepad.com/leading_answers/files/orig...

Conway's law:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conway%27s_law

Unrelated, Pournelle's Iron Law of Bureaucracy (I just like this law):

http://www.jerrypournelle.com/reports/jerryp/iron.html

X-Y Problem:

http://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/66377/what-is-the-xy...

Atwood, Don't Learn to Code:

http://blog.codinghorror.com/please-dont-learn-to-code/

Wason selection task:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wason_selection_task

LMGTFY:

https://www.google.com/search?q=pieget+constructive+learning https://www.google.com/search?q=curry+howard+isomorphism

Amazon Links, no referral:

http://www.amazon.com/Mindstorms-Children-Computers-Powerful... http://www.amazon.com/Peopleware-Productive-Projects-Teams-3... http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00B8USS14/ref=wl_mb_recs_2_title http://www.amazon.com/Design-Essays-Computer-Scientist-ebook...


Original thread
by vinalia
2014-04-07
It might be fun to look at LOGO (maybe UCBLogo[1], free books included) for a first programming language. This has a first-person (turtle) view on a GUI that you move around to make shapes and do math/physics. The idea is that when programming it will be easier for the programmer to associate themselves with the turtle and interaction/exploration in the language will be natural.

The Logo way is pretty different from conventional programming models because it was tailored to be more intuitive than conventional languages like C, JavaScript, or VB. It still offers access to complex, higher order programming concepts like algorithms, AI, automata, etc. Harold Abelson from MIT (SICP) wrote a cool book that covers math/physics in Logo, too.[2]

The creator of the language has an awesome book[3] on how computers can enhance pedagogy and someone wrote a cool blog post on programming for children that mentioned it too[4].

[1] http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~bh/logo.html

[2] http://www.amazon.com/Turtle-Geometry-Mathematics-Artificial...

[3] http://www.amazon.com/Mindstorms-Children-Computers-Powerful...

[4] http://worrydream.com/LearnableProgramming/


Original thread
by dahjelle
2014-03-28
I don't have a direct answer for you (still researching), but if you haven't read Mindstorms by Seymour Papert [1], I highly recommend it. It's generally about how computing can help kids learn problem solving in a variety of contexts, including several bits about the LOGO programming language. It's from '88, so it is definitely dated, but many of the concepts are pretty timeless.

[1] http://www.amazon.com/Mindstorms-Children-Computers-Powerful...


Original thread
by joelhooks
2013-10-11
I've been reading Papert's Mindstorms[1], which is a discussion on math education and the genesis of LOGO. If this topic interests you, I highly recommend the book.

[1] http://www.amazon.com/Mindstorms-Children-Computers-Powerful...


Original thread
by jfarmer
2013-08-10
Also, your friend should read Mindstorms: http://www.amazon.com/Mindstorms-Children-Computers-Powerful...

One of the major themes is the relationship children have with mathematics and ways teachers can change it.


Original thread
by EzGraphs
2013-08-01
Reminds me of Mindstorms:

http://www.amazon.com/Mindstorms-Children-Computers-Powerful...

In the intro of the book Seymour A. Papert describes how gears provided an early concrete framework that made understanding abstract mathematical concepts presented at a later point much easier to visualize and apply.


Original thread
by tel
2012-10-28
(Also at: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/118169b6-1d74-11e2-869b-00144feabd...)

I have a thesis that the kind of thinking required to survive med school is diametrically opposed to the kind of thinking required to do statistics well. It's the "rote pattern matching" versus "mathetic language fluency" issue that's at the heart of things like Papert's Constructivist learning theory[1] and it really causes me to have little surprise at an article like this. Doctors are (usually) viciously smart people who have to make a wide array of difficult decisions daily, but to operate at that level requires an intuition around a lot of cached knowledge, something I feel to be basically the opposite of statistical thought.

I don't think this is unique, either. It's the heart of Fisher's program to provide statistical tests as tools to decision-makers[2]. It's an undoubted success in providing general defense against coincidences to a wide audience, but it casts the deductive process needed in a pale light.

I think a principle component of the computer revolution is to provide more people with better insight into mathetic thought. Papert focuses on combinatorial examples in children in Mindstorms[3] but I think the next level is understand information theory, distributions, and correlation on an intuitive level. MCMC sampling went an incredible way to helping me to understand these ideas and probabilistic programming languages are a great step toward making these ideas more available to the common public, but we also need great visualization (something far removed from today's often lazy "data viz").

Ideally, things like means and variances will be concepts that are stronger than just parameters of the normal distribution---which I feel is about as far as a good student in a typical college curriculum statistics class in a science or engineering major can go---but instead be tightly connected to using distributions accurately when thinking of complex systems of many interacting parts and using concentration inequalities to guide intuition.

I think the biggest driver of the recent popularization of Bayesian statistics is that distributions as a mode of thought is something quite natural to the human brain, but also something rather unrefined. People can roughly understand uncertainty about an outcome, but have a harder time with conjunctions or risk. How can we build tools that will teach people greater refinement of these intuitions?

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructivism_(learning_theory... [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistical_Methods_for_Researc... [3] http://www.amazon.com/dp/0465046746


Original thread
by jfarmer
2012-10-12
I linked to it at the end of my comment, where I also mentioned who wrote it.

Here it is, again: http://www.amazon.com/Mindstorms-Children-Computers-Powerful...

Lego Mindstorms are named after it.


Original thread
by GHFigs
2011-06-16
Seymore Papert, in Mindstorms:

"By deliberately learning to imitate mechanical thinking, the learner becomes able to articulate what mechanical thinking is and what it is not. The exercise can lead to greater confidence about the ability to choose a cognitive style that suits the problem. Analysis of "mechanical thinking" and how it is different from other kinds and practice with problem analysis can result in a new degree of intellectual sophistication. By providing a very concrete down-to-earth model of a particular style of thinking, work with the computer can make it easier to understand that there is such a thing as a "style of thinking". And giving children the opportunity to choose one style or another provides an opportunity to develop the skill necessary to choose between styles. Thus instead of inducing mechanical thinking, contact with computers could turn out to be the best conceivable antidote to it. And for me what is the most important in this is that through these experiences these children would be serving their apprenticeships as epistemologists, that is to say learning to think articulately about thinking."

http://www.amazon.com/Mindstorms-Children-Computers-Powerful...


Original thread
by ThomPete
2010-11-16
I know I keep beating that horse.

But Seymore Paperts http://www.papert.org/ book "Mindstorms: Children, Computers, And Powerful Ideas"

http://www.amazon.com/Mindstorms-Children-Computers-Powerful...

Is great


Original thread
by ThomPete
2010-11-03
Seymore Paperts Mindstorms program. Read the book it's brilliant.

http://www.amazon.com/Mindstorms-Children-Computers-Powerful...


Original thread
by ThomPete
2010-09-05
Read Seymour Paperts book Mindstorms

http://www.amazon.com/Mindstorms-Children-Computers-Powerful...

The main point is to have children do something they understand from the real world and have a physical relationship with. That way it won't feel as abstract.


Original thread
by dhess
2009-02-24
Learning to build or repair a car would probably improve your understanding of thermodynamics, aerodynamics, momentum, etc. Likewise, writing a computer program that simulates the motion of a planet around a star or renders 3D graphics might improve your understanding of classical mechanics and any number of topics in math, just to name a few examples; cf.

http://www.amazon.com/Mindstorms-Children-Computers-Powerful...

http://www.amazon.com/Structure-Interpretation-Classical-Mec...

http://www.amazon.com/Turtle-Geometry-Mathematics-Artificial...

This is not to mention that learning how to program a computer is just another tool to put in your bags of tricks for solving problems in any of the domains you mentioned (some better suited than others, of course).


Original thread

Looking for a good book? Subscribe to the weekly newsletter.