The Aims of Software Criticism: Reply to Professor Papert
Educational Researcher Volume 16, Number 5, ISSN 0013-189X
Refutes Seymour Papert's premises because they: (1) maintain that computer criticism goes through developmental stages; (2) overlook the fact that the computer's newness in education affects the way people speak of computers; and (3) deny the necessity that teaching LOGO, like other pedagogies, should be accountable to experimental research. (PS)
Pea, R.D. (1987). The Aims of Software Criticism: Reply to Professor Papert. Educational Researcher, 16(5), 4-7.
Cited ByView References & Citations Map
Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 1994 (1994) pp. 226–229
Barry J. Fishman, University of Michigan, United States
Journal of Interactive Learning Research Vol. 11, No. 1 (2000) pp. 3–27
These links are based on references which have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake, please contact firstname.lastname@example.org.