stanley wrote: > I guess I don't understand "constructionism".
i think that's right. > > Is it reasonable to require that the development system run on the target > machine? yes. it's one of the reasons most activities, and many of the system, is coded in python. > If Apple had this requirement, all of the iPhone/iPod/iPad > applications would be gone. We wouldn't have any of the millions of > devices (mp3 players, routers, modems, fax machines, cell phones, etc.) that of course. but i don't think any of those would be considered educational tools, let alone embodiments of constructionism. (and nor would you, i'd guess.) > have embedded processors not capable of running their development tools. > The XO is the target machine. It's unreasonable to restrict development to > tools that run on the XO. it's not that unreasonable. kids learn by doing, and exploring. that's kind of the whole point of constructionism. if you give someone a game written using python and pygame, they can (in principle) modify that game to change the playing rules. if you give them that same game written in flash, they can't. it's really as simple as that. whether one agrees with the notion that this is important will vary, of course. paul =--------------------- paul fox, p...@laptop.org _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
