“Either give the child the best ideas we can muster about cognitive process or leave him at the mercy of the theories he invents or picks up in the gutter.” (pp. 354) The author questions if this is actually good or bad for the student. I believe that the stories young children invent is a part of letting their imagination run wild and just being a kid. As a child, I can remember believing that rain came from Angels in the sky, having bad days. Obviously, as I grew further in my education, I learned all about the weather and that was the end of that. I don’t believe that I was left at the “mercy of my imagination.” At that young age, even if someone had tried to explain to me the facts, I’m not sure I would have retained the information. It is important to always be informing children of the truth and facts, but at what age are we supposed to no longer let them have that imagination? When do we start feeding them the ins and outs of life and how things really work?
One of Papert’s examples of “Pop-Ed Thinking” includes the Faculty Theories. “Most children seem to have, and extensively use, an elaborate classification of mental abilities: “He’s a brain”, “He’s a retard,” “He’s dumb,” “I’m not mathematical-minded.” (pp. 355) I completely agree with what Papert is saying. As children we put ourselves into these classifications and they follow us into adulthood. Everyone makes acceptable excuses for the things that they are not good at. I feel like teachers even put their students into these classifications. Instead of “diagnosing the specific deficiency of knowledge or skill” (pp. 355) they simply move ahead in the lesson, only setting the child more behind. Even today, when math presents itself in my everyday life, I don’t even attempt to solve the problem. As I would say, “I’m mathematically challenged.” I’m not sure where I lost confidence in myself in the subject of math, but I definitely always assume that all math is just too difficult. I need to adjust how I actually think and diagnose my own specific math deficiencies to solve problems.
Papert has experimented with allowing children to develop computer programs to test on their peers. In today’s world, children at a young age are becoming very technologically advanced. I have met kindergarteners that owned cell phones and laptops. Allowing the students to build programs on computers involves them in ways that interest them. He states, “It is said that the best way to learn something is to teach it.” (pp. 356) In my opinion, this is an excellent way to gain further access into a student’s mind. Building a program would really make one have to use their brain and think about the different outcomes. In order to teach someone something, you have to have a full understanding of it yourself. I hope that teachers can find additional methods that allow their students to use technology to teach themselves and others.
As teachers and parents, we need to find that balance point between teaching a child to think and allowing them their own imagination. Teach students to logically think about problem solving and stop forming excuses when a challenging situation presents itself. Technology is the way of the future. It has created unparalleled efficiency and should be involved in every curriculum to enhance a child’s learning capabilities.
References
Papert, S., (1980). The Computer in School: Tutor, Tool, Tutee.
New York: Teachers College Press
No comments:
Post a Comment