Publishing Web for Students' Final Papers
Publishing Web for Students' Final Papers |
|
From: Miguel Berkstrom
Email: titan@cats.ucsc.edu
Course: psych 101:Informal learning & Technology
College: UCSC:Oakes
Instructor: Eugene Matusov
ClassWeb: http://www.ematusov.com/psych101
ChildrenObservations: Yes
Date: 13 Dec 1996
Time: 17:21:42
Remote Name: as-maclab-22.ucsc.edu
The pupose of this paper is to evaluate the children's comprehension of the computer. This will be done by evaluating their ability to perform and complete certain tasks or exercises. Also, their ability to understand directions from the computer will be looked at. This is in terms of being able to start up the computer, enter the program, exit the program, and shut down the computer propperly. The measurements for these criteria will be evaluated through research quotes, personal observations, and a small case study. The students names in the case study will be changed and the name of the site will be abbreviated to preserve anonymity.
Children learn many things in many ways. This paper will be addressing if children learn how to use a computer from a top-down or a bottom-up approach, and which type of learning is more beneficial. It may be that niether way is better or worse, local Santa Cruz Latino Youth Centert that is what needs to be found out through case studies, personal observations, and previous research.
While at the local Santa Cruz Latino Youth Center site I found that some children were grasping the ability to be self sufficient on the computers much faster than other kids. They were going straight to the computer and booting up the game all by themselves with out any help. While other children couldn't do a thing with out an undergraduate starting the program for them. This was intriguing to see. Did these accelerated kids learn computers from the top-down or the bottom-up? Upon interviewing them I found some quite interesting responses. I had to select kids who did not have prior computer involvement, as this could possibly give them an unfair advantage. So I only used answers in my case study that came from kids whose first contact with computers was at local Santa Cruz Latino Youth Center. In picking four responses I found that Jimmy and Mary had learned computers from the bottom-up. This meaning that they started out learning how to turn on the computer, put in the CD or disk, start the game, finish the game(whole or part), exit the game, and shut down the computer. With Jessica and Larry, they had always been placed in the program of their choice without ever learning any pre or post steps. Because of this they remained much less self sufficient at their station with out an undergraduate. As compared with the bottom-up kids who needed very little guidance.(M.Berkstrom Case Study,1996)
In viewing my own field notes I found that two things were inhibiting one girl from getting to her program. First was a language barrier in our communication, the other was the approach with which she had always been placed in to.(M. Berkstrom,Field Note #5) I found that she always was placed in to her program of choice. Every step prior to playing was done for her. As well when she left at the end of the day inevitably some one else would shut down her station. This made her very reliant on an undergraduate to start her program for her. This also caused frustration for her because she had to wait for an available person unlike other children who quite possibly were already in to the game they wanted. Since she learned the "why" of computers before the "how" it appeared to put her at a slight disadvantage. Fortunatley with computers it was not hard to show her how to set it up herself and ease all of her troubles and frustrations. After that she became much more self sufficient and comfortable with the computers. However, with the short amount of time we have each day it would of been more to her advantage to have learned the "how" first.
Finally, in research the bottom-up approach really helps children understand the workings of the computer and how to manipulate them. Here is a perfect illustration of this," Forced to organize information in to files with in files with in files, the children regularly practiced the use of heirarchical organization....In order to find the snail darter, a child needs to open first the Natural Causes file, then the Natural Disasters file, then the Flood file contained with in it, to find her text on snail darters."(Computers in a Community of Learners, J.Campione, A.Brown, M.Jay) When they have to use organizational skills and open several windows at a time it gives them a much better grasp of the "how". It is almost like a maze they must get through where how you get there is far more important than why you're getting there. This being true because the information you want is the "why" which can vary so much. The important aspect ends up being "how" since this process is very similar for almost all computers. So to learn from the bottom-up is appearing to be more beneficial.
This again can be seen in the next quote which says, " It is clear that students, even those with no prior computer experience, can easily be taught to use the basic elements of a variety of applications, and use them in an integrated way."( Computers in a Community of Learners, J.Campione, A.Brown, M.Jay) This quote shows how through the basics of how to use a computer children can grasp an array of applications for the programs. In other words the "how" of computers, or the bottom-up approach gives the children the neccesary tools for retrieving important information and applying that information in a useful manner. This is not to say that the top-down approach can not facilitate this, local Santa Cruz Latino Youth Centert it appears that the bottom-up approach has some advantages.
There are some critiques of these ideas however. First, I would like to point out that the program at local Santa Cruz Latino Youth Center was quite short. The kids who were learning the top-down approach may not have had enough time to reach the level where they learn the basics, or the "how". Secondly, since the program didn't focus strictly on these two concepts it's hard to say when and to what extent they were being applied. So level of progression is hard to measure due to the inconsistancy of it's application.
In closing I would like to say that I do not endorse either method alone. Neither is ideal or preferred. In actuality I would endorse attempting to apply both simultaneously or concurrently. Children frequently ask "why" and "how" together. So to explain both is the preferred thing to do. A good illustration of this is five core questions of a reporter: What, Where, When, Why, and how. As you can see the last two go hand in hand with the rest. They all must be asked to reach a complete answer. This is true of top-down and bottom-up learning as well. So, if at all possible please try to facilitate both.
