On Thursday 03 March 2005 13:19, Gavin McCullagh wrote:
> On Thu, 03 Mar 2005, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis) wrote:
> > BUT for basic use (i.e. excluding macro's and similar advanced
> > features) it really shouldn't matter which office suit (or e-mail
> > client, or browser, or ...) you're using. If it does matter that
> > arguably points to the fact that the user is unfamiliar with the basic
> > concepts behind each class of programs, i.e. it points to a clear lack
> > of skills that the school should remedie, not work around.
>
> Often the problem is with the teachers as much as the students. For
> example, a mid-fifties teacher may have very little training with
> computers but still has to get notes typed up. Given that their only
> experience is likely with MS Office, being given a mixture of two others
> at intervals is very confusing.
You're right that teachers (often older ones) not familiar with computers
often feel frustrated and confused when they have to use them.
The problem is that these people don't understand the program, to them it's
magic they just know 'if I do this sequence of steps, then I get this
result'. Such situations are always frustrating, and confusing as you have
no sense of control or understanding.
Furthermore at each minor change the confusion grows,and you have to start
all over, as you have no frame of reference with which to decide wether a
certain change/difference is cosmetic or important.
The way to solve that is to give them the frame of reference they lack.
Showing them how to do something in 2 different programs doesn't solve this
in itself, it does make it A LOT easier though.
(It is always impossible to conclusively decide what the general concept of
something is from just one example/sample. The more examples of something
you see the easier it becomes to say 'oh yeah, that's just a X, works like
this).
> > By having different programs of the same class available, and having
> > students switch between them at times [1]. You teach them to look for
> > the concepts behind the interface, instead of just learning the
> > interface by heart.
>
> In principal I agree with you. But in practice, I really don't see this
> as very practical currently. Naturally, different schools and countries
> may differ.
It's say it's _more_ practical (in the medium to long term) as you're giving
people a frame of reference, and thus a sense of control, understanding and
empowerment. If you fail to provide the frame of reference the frustratrion
and resentment (at /having/ to use the damn computer again) will just keep
growing, till at some point it becomes a major problem.
In the short term it's probably more involved (on the other hand once you
get them to understand some principle, you're a lot less likely to have to
show them the same thing again,and again, and again, and ...)
> > Should a school avoid this? Definately not, afterall the whole point of
> > schools is having people learn, and in today's world computer skills
> > are (increasingly) a neccesity.
>
> I would suggest it is up to the schools to decide this.
naturally.
> Although I agree in principal that this is a better way to teach.
which means we should promote it, no?
--
cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis):
Coördinator Belgisch Skolelinux team
Coördinator Nederlandse Skolelinux vertaling
Attachment:
pgpaZIUfA8YsE.pgp
Description: PGP signature