Give an erector set this iDay!
Olivia Judson, a research fellow in biology at Imperial College London, offers insightful commentary on science in columns regularly published in The New York Times. In her column titled “The Ten Days of Newton” published in the on 24 December 2008, Ms. Judson writes:
“Some years ago, the evolutionist and atheist Richard Dawkins pointed out to me that Sir Isaac Newton, the founder of modern physics and mathematics, and arguably the greatest scientist of all time, was born on Christmas Day, and that therefore Newton’s Birthday could be an alternative, if somewhat nerdy, excuse for a winter holiday.” read more of Olivia Judson’s column | K. Lee Lerner’s comment
I doubt there is consensus about what constitutes “learning,” period. We intuitively know what we think it means (and our conceptions are always situationally based), but upon deconstruction the term falls apart. IMHO it is part of the fallacy of the “test” mentality. Tests have a place (I.Q., specific aptitudes, end of term exams, etc.) but we vastly over test to measure “learning” when we have no basic agreement on what we are testing! At the end of the day we have a lot of teachers “teaching to the test,” and students learning to pass tests that are meaningless.
And, btw, the above paragraph contains all the postmodern lingo I know.
I suppose that “real learning” must be defined in the context of the material to be mastered. If the goal or task to be mastered involves spatial manipulation, I suppose an erector set might be of some use.
I don’t think I agree on this one, Lee. The sentiment is correct, but where is the hard data that any toy or genre of toys promotes real learning. What is real learning anyway?