learning in progress ….

Sitting on a train, after a day wrestling with a research proposal, an interesting synchronicity unfolds. Passengers cram in; opposite one starts a crossword puzzle. Adjacent, one opens a laptop and starts programming. A few minutes layer another passenger gets on, sits opposite, and starts a sudoku. A moment later the sudoku solver and the programmer recognise each other; obviously know each other a little; but don’t talk for long, and settle back to their tasks. I’ve been glancing at the programming beside me; its in a terminal window and is full of test cases and assertions. I guess it might be a test harness for an electronic board.

After a while I notice the approach the sudoku player is taking, systematically listing, in small script at the top of each cell, the candidate possibilities for each square, identifying the most constrained cells first – then reducing elements out other cells once one is determined. I find myself thinking of procedures I could use to program that - looping through each column, and row, with an array attached to each cell; - maybe with colour if one just wanted to hint at productive cells…. I glance back at the programmers screen –and it suddenly seems like that is exactly what he is programming - he flicks a window and I see its called sudoku.py.

My sudden conjecture is that there might be coworkers, since they did recognise each other … even though the common link of sudoku algorithms seems like improbable work .. so I break the convention of commuting silence and start a conversation. It turns out their common focus is not these little numerical puzzles - they actually did a computer science course some years ago; the manual sudoku solver now works in a bank; as a systems designer; the programmer works for a stockbroker, programming automated trading systems – both are tackling the sudokus for distraction.

We chat, and I talk about this research, and Sherry Turkle’s reservations on today’s notion of IT– around the that fact that 20 years ago many kids programmed computers for fun – we all agree on that - but today kids are more likely to be on MySpace or World of Warcraft. I mention my suspicion that the lack of a 'BASIC' – the simple, pre-installed language we learnt with, might contribute to this. I’m interested in their opinions.

The stockbroker programmer indicates, wryly, he is happy with the lack of competition coming through from junior programmers. The sudoko banker rebukes him, and warns that below a critical mass that whole sector of the IT industry will be outsourced to India. Working in a large bank, he sees it already; there are no local programmers below the system designers. He also seems bit conflicted about ICT in schools; since he has fond memories of the control he felt in teaching himself programming language, and spending hours trying to make games, on a Commodore 64; but isn’t sure there is a future in it now. The stockbroker programmer disagrees – loves the technical work and sees it as a good career option for students.

I feel like I should interview these two, incarnations of the concerns I’ve been reading over for two days; early dialogue in an ‘outcome space’.. after they leave at the little satellite town, I travel on, feeling I might be on to something - that the historical tensions around how IT is conceived corresponds to real and current issues, and the strength of this little debate tells me the issue goes beyond schools - and the idea of visual schematics to examine the tensions might work.

many in education seem set on cheerleading the '21st century ict' ='web 2.0' =transformation' theme - lots of syrupy youtube videos on that theme - but not everyone agrees, or at least not without reservations about what is missing in that equation. Some have even stepped away from the spin and grappled with an historical context that is surprisingly absent from all the discussion of ICT in schools. Its quite stabilising to have some sense of the real historical trajectory of educational computing - the popular idea that its all progressed ignores some of the real history.

i didn't even go to the conference, but i had been having a parallel discussion with the keynote speaker, Prof Stephen Heppell - after i heard him a couple of days later. i was going to email something to the list but i thought the issue deserved to go beyond transitory email - so here (with Stephen’s permission) it is:

My what big teeth you all have

I didn't get to the conference - so please ignore everything I am about to say.

Although I did hear Stephen Heppell at another forum - and lots of web2 examples etc - so maybe you can listen in again.

I liked his content, and sense of education and change - lots of interesting ideas, and felt like a good sense of kids and schools. I also had some questions, which I followed up in email with him - re classic tech IT,

"You mention that you put the “C” into ICT (not just old IT). I was interested in that as I have looked into the terms somewhat – and used them to structure a proposed enquiry(3) into my masters (around dimensions of engagement in classic IT and emergent ICT).

You strike me as a bit of both : Eg while the conference speaking etc would seem to sit more at the ICT end, there is a small font link to "Jolly Faithful XServe" -- “if you care about these things – (I do)” from http://rubble.heppell.net/ which is a pretty classic IT reference, underpinning all this digital creativity.

Small font acknowledging that caring about the underlying IT is an acquired taste, or ... geeky enough that can overpower learning or popular palette?

I wonder if we should aim at both IT and ICT in some way?

and if you think those more technical skills are at risk, if we aim at web 2 blogging and wikis and movie making, good as that is (very wide range – but depth?)

eg visions like that of Papert (Logo) and Kay (Smalltalk, Squeak, Etoys) - for computing to be child’s play – exploring big ideas in maths and science – do you think that might get less attention than deserving in this web2.0 context?

(you mentioned you use your ipod as a server - what does it serve?)

Stephen's response :

I get blamed for the C in ICT more than i claim it! But have always cared about geeky too - I was very prominent in the Hypercard movement when we had hosts of students and teachers making and swapping code and resources. We certainly have a crisis of capable developers and the crisis is even worse in terms of gender balance - very few girls now, although wasn't originally the case. In truth we really lack "low start high finish" tools that can get developers up and running quickly - Dylan, VIP, Script X and a number of others promised this, but came to naught - we still need them.

many children now see the computer as a tool for creative and other fab work, but not enough as something that they can develop themselves - ie they consume applications rather than evolve them. I do worry about this heaps.

I just have a bunch of token pages - including video streaming - on my iPod's Apache - obviously as you flit from network to network the IP wander about so it isn't much use serving a domain name for example. But is is fun! S "

So in reading that - a few themes I might not have expected - which possibly aren't prioritised in his presentations I guess :

• Need for "low start high finish" tools
• Crisis in lack of developers
• Tendency to see computer as only 'fab tool'
• *Tendency to consume not evolve apps* (compare http://www.edutopia.org/no-gamer-left-behind)
• **Worrying heaps about all this**

Rob : One more question,

I heard Jamie McKenzie a while ago, and his presentation was also largely expounding the learning that is facilitated by web 2, but his writings & website, show some other concerns - eg recently a scathing critique of the whole 'digital native' meme

Stephen Heppell:

Well, I don't buy the digital native either - look at how MySpace is now full of pensioners doing their family trees, etc etc. Kids got there early, but maybe the difference is between those of a mechanical era (who worry things might break) and those of a digital era (who enjoy finding what does break!). But I think Marc Prensky did the world, and esp the US some big favours with his Digital Native thing because it gave people a chance to think afresh. With the pace of change if (as many did) you fail to notice the pace, then it takes a big push to get back up to speed with whree we are in all this - and the DigiNative stuff was that (useful) big push.

So a more nuanced view of the pluses and minuses of web 2 & digital native etc than it might seem - not that we should be surprised, if we let people be 3D, and not projections of our limited view.

Actually maybe, since we all love Higher Order Thinking and all that, we need to take up the challenge Bill Kerr has issued - eg Do a PMI or 6 hats where it matters - on trends in IT education - do a 6 hats on that?

those tools are all a bit dinky when the topic is too safe; if we rule our own assumptions as out of court

cheers all -

PS sure the conference was great, flawed, fascinating - as we all are

PPS (I also left early to go meet Bill, who has put some very interesting stuff in my path (Squeak, Etoys, an amazing thesis on Alan Kay's vision of the dynabook (- revolution there, maybe))

PPPS Someone on the list (Carolyn?) made the point that the conference title "you say you want a revolution?" was more challenging that it might appear at first glance .... we might read it as a naïve proclamation : "ICT / Web 2 = revolution"

the intention was apparently a bit more challenging - you say you want a revolution ..... well how are we going? etc

(much as I appreciate Bills input and generosity re all things Squeak - his "take no prisoners" approach in discussing the conference - is, well, very 'passionate'/provocative - and we like that, no?)

[errata - Bill has pointed below that i've mis-attributed a comment on the discussion list; wasn't actually him who made comment on the conference in the "take no prisoners" style of language. It seemed out of character to his usual depth of argument - but was my mistake- i've apologised below. His points are still strongly argued, of course, but not insulting.]