“In my view, a key to the current trends of discussion about technology and education is an ironic fact about the imbalance between informational and constructional. Whereas the most qualitatively original contribution digital technology could make to education lies in redressing the imbalance, in fact the imbalance is increased by popular perception that so strongly […]
“Children who grow up with the opportunity to explore the jungles and the cities and the deep oceans and ancient myths and outer space will be even less likely than the players of video games to sit quietly through anything even vaguely resembling the elementary-school curriculum as we have known it up to now.” Papert,
Q: What is the point of having a curriculum? A: “I think there’s not only no point in it, but that it does incredible harm. It turns the teacher into a technician whose job is to hand out facts, not someone who’s in a human relationship with students, someone whose job it is to help
“The phrase “computer literacy” has such a devalued meaning by now that its almost impossible to rescue it. Ive been using the term “technological fluency.” I dont think we have language yet for talking about the kind of knowledge people have about or through these new technologies. Say someone is fluent in French. This doesn’t
Papert wrote the following in the second issue of Wired Magazine back in 1993! “I see then a pattern of intellectual development that I shall oversimplify by casting it in three distinct phases. The first phase is one of universally successful learning. All children show a passion for interactive exploration of their immediate world. The
“Literacy refers not just to being able to read, but to having taken in a whole culture around reading, a culture which usually comes through reading. With multimedia, the role of the written word may become much less important. In the future I suspect we will be less likely to associate people who are educated
“By asking questions such as: “What’s the best way to teach science,” there’s an implication that there’s a single entity that can make that decision. It’s not like that, maybe never was.” Moore, A. (1998) Seymour Papert quoted in archived article, Targets Hit, Targets Missed — Seymour Papert, chronicling his speech at the October 1998
“It [education] is analogous to a market-driven economy. Like Darwinian evolution, numerous interplays allow many results to organically emerge. How do we intervene in this divergent, organic, apparently chaotic system? As in a “free market” the government doesn’t tell us how many nails to produce, but it does intervene in the economy; the FDA doesn’t
“Games never advertise as being easy; rather, how difficult. Kid never say schools is too hard; they say it’s boring. Yet we still insist on “making it easier.” Game designers know that if games aren’t hard, they will go out business. Well, curriculum designers must make it easy to get through, to encourage more curriculum
“Information technology is the wrong name, and leads to its misuse. The fact that you can get a lot of information out of the Net is NOT merely what it’s about. Most digital technologies — processors and chips, for example — are not about information at all. They are constructional medium…we make things from them.