Month: January 2018

Don’t Dissect the Frog, Build It

Nicholas Negroponte, on how synthesis can be better for learning than analysis:

On April 11, 1970, Seymour Papert held a symposium at MIT called “Teaching Children Thinking” and placed a new stake in the groundwork of epistemology. His notion was based on using computers as engines which children would teach and thus learn by teaching. He moved the locus of interest from how computers can teach to how children learn. This astonishingly simple idea simmered for almost fifteen years before it came to life through PCs. Today, when almost 30 percent of all American homes contain a personal computer, the idea really has come into its time.

Certainly, some learning derives from great teaching and telling a good story. We all remember our good teachers. But a major measure of learning results from exploration, from re-inventing the wheel and finding out for yourself. Until the computer, the tools and toys for these experiences were limited, special-purpose apparatuses, frequently administered with extreme control and regimentation (my excuse for not learning chemistry).

The computer changed this radically. All of a sudden, learning by doing has become the standard rather than the exception. Since computer simulation of just about anything is now possible, one need not learn about a frog by dissecting it. Instead, children can be asked to design frogs, to build an animal with froglike behavior, to modify that behavior, to simulate the muscles, to play with the frog.

and

Funding of Media Lab research from Interlego A/S, the Danish company that owns Lego in the US, has resulted in an important contribution to products in Lego’s Dacta division (“LEGO TC Logo” and “Control Lab”), which have been used in elementary and secondary schools by more than one million children. The computer-controllable Lego allows children to endow their physical constructs with behavior. Both anecdotal evidence and careful testing results reveal that this constructivist (as Papert calls it) approach has an extraordinary reach, across a wide range of cognitive and learning styles. In fact, many children said to be learning disabled flourish here. Perhaps we have been more “teaching disabled” than “learning disabled.”

 

Parity Purchasing Power

I was pleasantly surprised to see this notification at the top of React for Beginner’s site:

Parity purchasing power discout at React for Beginners

It said:

Hey! I noticed you are coming from Indonesia where this course may be a bit expensive.

I support Parity Purchasing Power — I want to make this course affordable for everyone around the world.

If you need it, use the code INDONESIALOVE for an extra 52% off the listed prices.

Parity purchasing power is something I haven’t heard before. According to The Balance:

Purchasing power parity is an economic theory that states residents of one country should be able to buy the goods and services at the same price as inhabitants of any other nation over time.

and

Purchasing power parity is used in many situations. The most common method is to adjust for the price differences between countries. For example, China produced $10.98 trillion in goods and services in 2015. The U.S. produced $17.95 trillion. You cannot compare the two without taking into account the fact that the cost of living in China is much lower than in the United States.

For example, a McDonald’s Big Mac costs $5.04. In China, you can get the same thing for only $2.79. People in China don’t need as much income because it costs less to live. For more fun comparisons, see The Economist’s Big Mac Index.