> It would seem to be more reasonable to start with a working assumption > that in working with children we should be working with materials and > objects that have immediacy and obviousness that computers do not and > cannot have.
I think we could start with that assumption, yes. Young children need to be developing gross and fine motor skills, becoming coordinated in more important ways than sitting in front of a computer. Learning to walk, learning to run, that sort of thing (play ball, tie shoe laces...). My three videos synch at a different level. I'm presuming junior is ready for my Monkey and Dog talk because it's time for algebra already, and we're teaching the GCD, prime versus composite, other such concepts *already* at that age. And by now I think it's a waste of time and a disservice to them to not start with a computer language of some variety. In geek culture anyway, the computer is like the piano forte was (is?) to those Vienna types in whatever golden age. If you had any aspirations to being a part of "the scene" you needed some musical instrument skills. Plus you want to start exposure young enough to see if you have some child prodigies. You can't have child prodigies if you keep the computer locked up until they have beards. Kirby _______________________________________________ Edu-sig mailing list Edu-sig@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/edu-sig
