LearningForward

Kent Chesnut's technology in education blog.

It’s been years since I looked at - or even thought about - any of Apple’s Classrooms of Tomorrow (ACOT) information.  However, a guest post by Sherman Nicodemus on Wes Fryers Speed of Creativity blog (see blog roll) in March spurred both my memory and my interest.  Sherman noted that Apple no longer had the ACOT 10 year report online, but did provide a link where it could be found (here). 

The ACOT research was done from 1985 - 1995 with the primary goal of understanding how sufficient technology and good professional support can affect teaching learning in real classrooms.  I reread the report yesterday - and found it still very relevant.

Some highlights from the report:

•  Apple supplied 2 computers to each student and teacher to ensure that the technology was available at (almost) any time.  Wow!  Contrast that to many of today’s 1:1 programs that supply easily transported laptops - and then don’t allow the students to take them from the school!
• The table on page 13 describing the differences between the ACOT and traditional classrooms is extremely relevant in today’s discussions of what learning should be.  A snapshot is shown below. 

• The stages of teacher adoption table on page 16 should also prove instructive for moving classrooms to a more learner centered approach.  See the snapshot below.

• Without going into any specifics, I’ll spit out a few more terms / concepts that are at least mentioned in the paper.
  • Learner control
  • Constructivism
  • Peer teaching
  • Wireless technologies (in the 80’s and 90’s???)
  • Create / Communicate / Collaberate
  • Reduced lectures
  • Inquiry driven
  • PD in a real classroom
  • Use of communications to access remote experts
  • Use of professional tools
  • Authentic learning experiences
  • Authentic assessment

Many of us older folks who’ve been around educational technology for quite a while have probably heard about the ACOT project in the past… maybe even read the ACOT report years ago… I recommend a re-read.  Many of the younger folks in the ed tech field may never have heard of ACOT.  The paper is an easy read of 24 pages - I recommend it highly.

As usual, I’d appreciate any input readers may have.

In my last post, I discussed building input devices for Scratch (see here).  My goal was to create a peripheral that could help get more kids interested in Scratch, programming, and educational endeavors in general (by providing more intrinsic motivation).

My first peripheral - a Scratch Balance Board.  The idea was to allow some neat activities like the Wii balance board.

 Remember that you will NEED the PicoBoard interface discussed in the previous post.  The cost is $50 plus $10 shipping to Oklahoma.

Background

I started this project wanting to build a practical Wii clone.  The tough part of the balance board is pressure sensing.  Load cells are very expensive!  And Force Sensing Resistors are only good for very small loads.  So I changed my goal - to build a very simple balance board using parts that can be easily and cheaply acquired (or hopefully scrounged).

Design

Note that I’m a software engineer and am a real klutz when it comes to mechanical things.  This design is not meant for production - it’s meant so that an adult and kid can put this together and play with writing Scratch programs using the balance board as an input device.

Here’s a picture of the outside.

It’s basically a simple box comprised of the following:

• 2 1″x12″ boards cut 22″ long for the top and bottom.
• A frame around the boards made of 1″x4″ boards.
• The bottom 1×12 is screwed in place.
• The top 1×12 sits on top of an elaborate force management system (more on that later).
• Note that the top 1×12 must slide easily within the frame.
• k
• Sorry about the extra lines
• but needed to keep pics from
• getting screwed up.
• If the pics aren’t lined up on
• the right side, try making your
• window narrower or wider.
• k

Here’s a picture of the inside with the “elaborate force management system”.  This elaborate system is composed of 4 tennis balls which are just placed at the 4 corners of the box.

Switches are placed at the center of each side to detect where the user is standing / leaning.

Note that the switches are mounted to scraps of 2″x4″ boards.   The 2×4’s are glued in place with standard school glue.

• k
• k
• k
• k
• k
• k
• k
• k
• k

As you can see from the closeup, each switch is comprised of 2 small screws.  These screws are parallel to the side of the box frame and 3/4″ away from the frame.  The screws are 1/2″ apart.

The wires are held in place by the screw being tightly screwed into the board.

• k
• k
• k
• k
• k
• k
• k
• k
• k
• k
• k
• k

The switch is activated when the top is pressed down.  This picture shows the other half of a switch mounted to the upper 1×12.

The washer is about 1″ in diameter and held in place with scotch tape.

Note that the objects under the washer are rubber tubing (about 1/4″).  These tubes serve 2 very important purposes:

• Allow washer to flex when contacting the screws.  This flexibility is needed to allow the switches to work even if the screws are not exactly the same height.  This also allows the switches to stay made even when the board is tilted on the perpendicular axis (i.e. you can lean forward and make the up contact even while leaning left and right.
•  Using the tennis balls as the suspension system is easy, but leaves no adjustment.  Adjusting the height of the washer off of the top 1×12 changes the force needed to activate the switch.
• k
• k
• k
• k

The screenshot at right shows a script I have attached to the background.  Notice that the script will work in either of the following 2 conditions:

• The force required to activate the switch is high compared to the weight of the user.  The user must lean toward a switch to activate it.
• The force required to activate the switch is low compared to the weight of the user.  When the user stands on the board without leaning, all the switches (or at least a pair of them - right/left or up/down) are activated.  When the user leans toward a switch, the opposite switch opens.

Note that no message is sent if opposite switches are both met.

The biggest shortcoming in the design is the force adjustment described above.  A system that allows the washer to be flexible but also allows for adjustment toward and away from the top 1×12 would be very helpful.

 I’ll look at 2 or 3 simple programs to use with the board in my next post.  I’d love to hear any comments or suggestions.

The “conversation with your computer” program I described in my last post (see here) is progressing very slowly… I’m just not putting the time I need to into it!  I’ll try to get a proto up this month.

But another question has captured my (often fleeting) attention.  Have you ever attended a class in which you were simply told to follow instructions… do this, then that, then whatever?  No attempt was made to motivate the importance (or even to explain the purpose) of the activities.  Were you left feeling like a 2nd grader (at least that’s how I perceive 2nd graders are treated in normal elementary classrooms)?  When I thought on this, I realized that I’ve probably taught kids’ classes in a Church setting using strategies similar to that!  I’ve committed to always do better.  But what does better mean?  I think this means that students must be treated as partners in their education!  And I believe student buy-in to the learning task is very important to this goal.

But how important is student buy-in in learning?  How does buy-in affect the achievement of learning objectives?  I don’t know the answer… but I’d like to lay out a few ideas and look for a path to follow for investigating this question… and ask for any input readers may have.

There’s probably a better, more technically accurate term for what I’m calling “buy-in”, but I can’t think of it at the moment.  I define buy-in as: 

• Explaining to students the relevance and importance (worthwhileness?) of an activity or topic before beginning instruction.
• Soliciting feedback from students regarding their impression on whether the activity or topic is worthwhile - and addressing their concerns - before beginning instruction. 
• Allowing students to take part in discussions / decisions on how the topic will be covered and assessed.  This may be pretty tough - but in line with Alfie Kohn’s Choices for Children article.

It seems clear to me that student buy-in could:

• take more time and effort than simply covering content.
• enhance student intrinsic motivation (if the instruction is really relevant and they understand how it is relevant).  If the teacher can’t provide a good argument for how the instruction is relevant to the students, intrinsic motivation probably won’t be aided.
• allow children to function as a partner in their education - instead of a vessel to be filled with knowledge.
• provide the children with the self-respect associated with being a partner with adults. 

Questions to consider:

• Is student buy-in typically solicited in school (elementary, secondary, or post-secondary) classrooms? 
• What is the ”educational” term for “buy-in”?
• Is there research examining the importance of buy-in in learning?
• How is “buy-in” related to pedagogy?  Traditional education?  Project based learning?  Constructivism?  Constructionism?
• What are the costs of soliciting student buy-in?  (in terms of time, …?)
• What are the costs of not soliciting student buy-in?

I’ll be looking into these questions… but I’m not sure where to start.  If a reader has any ideas or input, I’d sure like to hear them!

So my daughter’s English class is reading “The Adventures of Huckleberry Fin”.  This is a book Brit has read before and really likes.  When noting that they were reading this book, Brit commented that it’s really sad; because this is a great book and she’s afraid it’ll be taught in such a way that the class will hate it.  What does she mean by this?  That an interesting story will be turned into a set of schedules, analysis exercises, tests, and scores.  All intrinsic interest in the story will be killed for the sake of getting a grade. 

As I mentioned in an earlier post, I’m reading Dewey’s “Democracy and Education”.  I’ve included a rather lengthy quote from chapter 3 below.

“For when the schools depart from the educational conditions effective in the out-of-school environment, they necessarily substitute a bookish, a pseudo-intellectual spirit for a social spirit. Children doubtless go to school to learn, but it has yet to be proved that learning occurs most adequately when it is made a separate conscious business. When treating it as a business of this sort tends to preclude the social sense which comes from sharing in an activity of common concern and value, the effort at isolated intellectual learning contradicts its own aim. We may secure motor activity and sensory excitation by keeping an individual by himself, but we cannot thereby get him to understand the meaning which things have in the life of which he is a part. We may secure technical specialized ability in algebra, Latin, or botany, but not the kind of intelligence which directs ability to useful ends. Only by engaging in a joint activity, where one person’s use of material and tools is consciously referred to the use other persons are making of their capacities and appliances, is a social direction of disposition attained.”  (Emphasis mine.)

Not exactly Brit’s point… but very complementary to it. 

Because of the external control that a teacher can assert, the class will read this book.  They will do the exercises and take the tests.  They will learn something.  But if I understand Brit’s point, they will probably do it out of compulsion and probably not enjoy it.

Assuming the book is taught as a set of individual assignments and assessments (and not as some sort of constructive social activity); another thing they are not likely to do, if I understand Dewey’s point, is to internalize any social or moral lessons that could be gained from the book.  They won’t become better or wiser people.

I certainly hope I’m wrong… I’ll report back if I’m pleasantly surprised.

Next week, I hope to get back to some technology.

Good grief, where’s the ed tech?  Another reflective post?  What’s up with this? 

Last week, I read and commented on Clay Burrell’s post “How Freedom Can Depress Students“.   Clay discusses research that indicates that “good” school experiences (where students are provided autonomy to make decisions about how they learn and how they demonstrate their learning) may actually be bad for students since such experiences are few and far between.  The premise is that the “normal” classes that will inevitably come will prove depressing.

I personally agreed with the depressing part… but argued that the good experiences are good…  I’ve copied my comment below.

“Clay,
Great article!

What a deal! One of the things I want most for my kids… an educational setting that provides the freedom to allow their intrinsic motivation and love of learning to flourish will make them depressed when that is taken away.

I totally agree that this is true… and have seen it in one of my own children. After a school [year] with some really good experiences, the next year was pretty pathetic.

However, I view the good experience as a good thing… my child now knows what it is like to really enjoy learning. She may not get to enjoy it right at this moment, but she knows that given the right environment she will! She also seems to have a better understanding of what is going on when classes are not any fun… she doesn’t blame herself anyway.

Just my 2 cents… keep up the great articles.
Kent”

As I thought about this a little more, I became disturbed that both Clay and I seemed to accept that the kids are powerless in this situation.  This powerlessness was also portrayed in my prison metaphor in a recent post called “Fix the Kids“.

I’m pretty resolved to the fact that I can’t fix the schools.  So the other alternative is to empower the kids… with a love of learning on their own!  When school is good… that’s great.  When it’s lousy… they will adapt.  When it’s over, they’ll be lifelong learners.  Maybe they’ll be able to fix the schools of the future!

The purpose of this post is to consider this question:

“What can I do, within the school or apart from the school, that can help my children (and others I’m in contact with) develop a love and passion for learning?”

Unfortunately, I don’t have good answers.  But I think the answers will include some of these elements:

• Working with them on interesting projects outside of school (learning Scratch or Logo, building animated stories for Children’s Worship lessons, trying to figure out how to get that PSP to ???, encouraging investigation of constructive software).  The goal is for them to understand that learning can be engaging and relevant, even if school is not.

• Working with them and encouraging them with school projects (science fairs, in class demonstrations, homework, …)

• Being honest… When a class is being taught poorly (highly structured, teacher centered, repressive), let the child know.  When a class is being taught well (learner centered, relevant, cooperative), let them know that too!  (This may not be appropriate for younger students - especially those that might relay your comments to their teacher!!… but how young is too young?)

• Treating school as important… but being careful to make sure that they know their value is not tied to school performance.  And making sure that they know that there is plenty of valuable learning that takes place outside of school.

I’ll be considering this further… but would love to hear any ideas a reader might have.

This week I was asked to serve as a “harsh reader” for a grant application for a  local school.  Although I don’t know anything about grant applications (and I explained this to the requester), I did think it would be interesting to read one… so I read through and provided input where I thought it might help (I only hope I wasn’t too harsh ;-).

This was Wednesday.  By Thursday I was thinking about the grant application and its assumptions.  I certainly can’t describe the whole grant, but I’ll give an overview.  A couple of junior high schools in this district have significantly higher rates of suspension and performance gaps than the state average.  The grant proposal is to hire a graduation coach for each of these 2 schools.  The purpose of the coach will be to identify students who (according to certain criteria) are likely to be drop outs before graduation, design and implement intervention and incentive programs to keep them in school.  These at-risk students were described as disengaged in school and having behavioral problems and numbered somewhere between 13% - 25% of the schools’ populations.

It all seemed so reasonable… until I started thinking about the underlying assumptions.  These students don’t see any value in school, they haven’t been successful there, school has no relevance to them, they are going to be stuck in school for several more years with no way out,  and they cause problems.  So let’s hire a couple of guys to fix the kids! 

Why not fix the schools to make them relevant and engaging?!?   No, that doesn’t seem to be in the plan.  Instead, we’ll identify and target these at-risk kids with a series of behavioral modification techniques (as I would perceive intervention and incentive programs) to try to get them to fit in with the way school is done.

To think about… 

• Are the other 80% of the students in school engaged, enthusiastic learners?  Or are a great majority simply “doing their time” with the hopes of being released when their sentences are up (i.e. finish 12th grade)?
• Are students that are strongly engaged (at least trying to get good grades and not causing trouble) well served by the schools as they are?
• How many of the classes that your child(ren) are in (or have been in) have caught their imagination, engaged them to learn (not just get a good grade), and have motivated them to work their hearts out for the love of the subject?  In my case, there have only been a very few - but it it’s great to see my children motivated in this way.  What would school be like if only 2 - 3 classes each semester reached this level of engagement?  I’m afraid the school atmosphere would be so disrupted that somebody would put a stop to it!   

Alfie Kohn has a couple of good articles on this subject, “Constant Frustration and Occasional Violence: The Legacy of American High Schools” and “Choices for Children: Why and How to Let Students Decide”.  I recommend them both if you want to think further about these issues.  Gary Stager’s article about working with kids in the Main Youth Center (juvenile detention center), “Constructive Technology as the Key to Entering the Community of Learners”, is also great (and fits in with my prison metaphor).

In Jeopardy style… the question is

What’s the quickest way to destroy intrinsic motivation to learn?

See the story here. 

Alfie Kohn explores this in a number of his articles… one of which is here.   Here’s a quote from the article that explains the relationship between extrinsic and intrinsic motivation:

“The more people are rewarded for doing something, the more they tend to lose interest in whatever they had to do to get the reward.”

As the new year approached, I was involved with the conversation on Will Richardson’s blog post “Some New Year’s Dreaming“.  The conversation moved toward how schools could be damaging to kids, how to make them better, …  As a parent (not professionally involved in education), I struggle with - and blog about - ways that I can be involved in improving education.

It was a fortuitous time for me to think about this… as I was working on my personal goals for 2008.  The conversation on Will’s blog helped me formulate my own educational technology goal for 2008.

Create / implement a series of 3 short term projects (1 week daily - maybe 2 months of Saturday AM) that will increasingly engage small groups of kids (< 15) in constructive and relevent learning situations in an effort to mitigate some of the damage done by schools and possibly (hopefully) provide a model for more successful project efforts.  At least one of these will be geared toward one or more of my own children.  At least one of these will be geared toward those less fortunate and provide opportunities for one or more of my children to contribute. 

Note: I contemplated pulling the section about “damage” out as it may come across as offensive.  Please read the comments on Will’s blog for context.

In thinking about how to implement such projects, I’ve concluded that Churches would be a good venue.  Ours (Fresh Start Community Church) is in Moore, OK, in one of the less affluent areas of the city.  We have an after-school program for neighborhood kids that I suspect will provide some students.  It’s handy that we also have a computer lab.  Other Churches in more urban areas have partnered with schools in a project called Whiz Kids.  These partnerships may provide a fruitful place to begin.

To get started, I’ve proposed 2 such projects at my Church

Saturday Scratch Camp – Children will learn the basics of computer programming and discover creative applications using the Scratch programming environment.  For information on Scratch, see the following links http://scratch.mit.edu and my blog entries about Scratch;  http://g4classes.com/learningforward/?p=7 (What is Scratch), http://g4classes.com/learningforward/?p=12 (Scratch Compared to NetLogo), http://g4classes.com/learningforward/?p=15 (Scratch uses in the classroom).  The idea would be to meet with the kids for 2 – 3 hours for 4 – 6 Saturdays.  Appropriate grades would likely be 4 – 8.  The kids would work on projects of their own choosing and the adults would facilitate brainstorming and problem-solving. 

Writing for a Global Audience; be a blogger – Children will learn the basics of blogging.  This may be more appropriate for Junior High age kids (and they will need to have permission for internet access) although the fifth and sixth graders probably have the requisite skills – but maybe not the inclination.  There are numerous blogs on the internet on all possible subjects – very good ed tech blogs (my area of interest) are http://www.speedofcreativity.org and http://www.weblogg-ed.com.  My personal blog is http://www.g4classes.com/learningforward (not too great - but an example of an amateur blog).  The idea would be to meet with the kids for 2 – 3 hours for 4 – 6 Saturdays.  The kids would be provided with blogs and could work as individuals or small groups to write about their interests.  One (somewhat risky) alternative to this blogging idea could be to provide guidance on how to implement a MySpace web presence.  I know this would motivate the kids – but might be too controversial.

I’d appreciate any comments on my proposals - and any other ideas you might have that would help me meet my goal.

Note added 1/11/08  I received an e-mail this week describing some potentially offensive material in Guitar Hero 3.  To quote from the e-mail (the text is essentially the same as on this Wikipedia article)…

Guitar Hero III: Legend of Rock is the first game in the series to feature a storyline for the Career mode, portrayed through animated cartoon scenes in between venues. The band starts out as a neighborhood sensation, before hooking up with a record producer named “Lou” at one of their shows. After a successful music video hits the web, the band travels to England, and then performs at an Island jail (despite “Lou” encouraging them to “sell out”), which ends up boosting the band’s popularity. As a result, they are invited to headline the Desert Rock Tour festival. After a botched performance in Japan (thanks to “Lou”) they attempt to break free of their contract with “Lou”, who then reveals himself to be the DEVIL and the contract as ownership of their souls. The band is dragged down to “Lou’s Inferno”, where the final showdown comes. In this final showdown, the player must defeat “Lou” in a boss battle to earn back the band’s souls and the title of “Guitar Legend”.

If you feel my ideas (see original post below) are worth pursuing, I’d suggest you use an earlier version of Guitar Hero - which, according to this quote - does not have the animated cartoon storyline. 

 Original Post:

We bought our 15 year old daughter Guitar Hero for Christmas after she raved about it after a friend’s party.  What a game!  By the way, you don’t really learn how to play the guitar… it’s just a game - but it has wide appeal.  Our 10 year old loves it and is getting better.  The 15 year old loves it and is good at it.  Our 20 year old confessed he and his friends have gotten together in the past and played it well into the night.  I’m closing in on 50 and enjoy it and am actually improving!

So why is it appealing? 

1. It is very interactive for the person playing.  First you pick your avatar (who plays guitar in the videos) and name your band.  When it’s time to play, you hold a small plastic guitar that has 5 buttons where the outer frets should be and another switch where you pretend to strum the guitar.  The “music” you are to play comes at you on what looks like a music staff.  As the “notes” reach small circles, you play them.  (Click this link and then click on Media for a screenshot showing 2 staffs on screen with notes.)  If you do it right, you hear your guitar in with the song.  If you miss, you get a clanking sound instead.  The game itself has great intrinsic appeal (you really want to play it right) and extrinsic also (you have to do well enough or the song stops and you get boo’d off the stage).  The user interface is extremely good - and, in my opinion, probably the key to the success of the program.  We have Guitar Hero 3 - Legends of Rock and the music is all rock ranging from pretty old (think Stones and Foghat) to the new rock (I don’t know who these people are! Is this really music?  OK, I’m getting pretty old!).  There’s lots more going on - but I think you get the idea.  For more information, find a friend with the game or read through the Wikipedia article here.
2. Unlike many games, Guitar Hero has great observer appeal.  The video background is great… and it’s also fun to provide constant feedback (positive, negative, or downright insulting) to the person playing. 

So why am I talking about it in a educational technology blog? 

I believe a creative educator could use Guitar Hero in a music class - seriously.  I sometimes watch my daughter play and try to figure out how to do the song she’s playing.  I find I’m thinking in terms of timing (quarter-notes, half-notes, speed…) and comparing what the “play” guitar is playing to what is going on in the song.  Possible music class applications include:

• Assume only 5 notes associated with the 5 switches and put a song from Guitar Hero into music notation.  I believe that when done as a small group (or possibly even a class) project, this could generate good discussions and constructive learning.  Can you play the song with the music from the game?  When does it sound good?  When does it sound bad?  Why?
• Convert sheet music to Guitar Hero notation.  Compressing to 5 notes is the main problem (maybe this has something to do  with the “key” a song is written in - I’m way out of my expertise here!).  Can you play the song?  How does it sound different from the original?  How can you make it better?
• Note - I’m not a musician.  There are probably lots of concepts in music that could be investigated in this manner, I just don’t know what they are.

I mentioned above the the user interface (how the guitar, video, moving notes, etc all work together) is probably the key to the success of the program.  It is elegant - but the functional elements are not terribly complicated.  I think a creative educator could use Guitar Hero in a computer class - seriously.  Possible programming applications include:

• Investigation / analysis of the Guitar Hero user interface.   Discuss possible applications in other settings (operating system user interface? business software?).  This would probably work at a high school (or above) level.  Personal note - If this activity seems to be a stretch of reality, good!  Think about the advances sparked by the Xerox PARC project including the mouse and the graphic user interface (GUI) that form the user interface of virtually all modern PCs.
• Use a programming environment like Scratch to create your own version of Guitar Hero.  The sophistication of such a model would depend on the level of programmer and programming environment used.  I don’t suspect that the background videos are practical… but kids who are properly motivated (that are doing something because they want to - for the pleasure / value they derive from the effort - a.k.a. intrinsic motivation) can do remarkable things (in other words, I wouldn’t stop them from trying)!

Do you have an unstoppable urge to do a cross-curricular music / computer project?  A couple of ideas come up here as well:

• Use the model you programmmed to create your own Guitar Hero songs (based on sheet music, music you have written, or music on CDs). 
• Investigate, design, and create a program like Guitar Hero that “really” teaches one to play the guitar.  By the way, if it works well and is as fun as Guitar Hero, you might just find yourself rich.

One last note (pun intended).  I’d suggest that implementing activities such as those I’ve mentioned above can generate powerful engagement and learning in the classroom - if the intrinsic motivation of the task is NOT destroyed.  Introducing such activities by listing how many points they are worth and how they will be graded - like providing a 2 page rubric to students - will surely kill any intrinsic motivation and most learning.  Maybe, just this once, try one of the shorter ideas just to see how much the kids can learn, do, and enjoy without worrying about a grade.

That’s my 2 cents worth.  I’d sure love to hear other ideas like this.

In Mindstorms - Children, Computers, and Powerful Ideas (published in 1980), Seymour Papert seemed to foresee that schools would leave the great potential of the computer as a constructive tool largely untapped.  We can clearly see this - schools now have a significant number of powerful computers - but most are used to teach keyboarding, Microsoft Office, or to “look stuff up” on the internet.

In Chapter 8, Images of the Learning Society, Papert discusses possible venues that might be used as models to create learning environments that support the use of the computer in a way compatible with his ideas - “one that helps us not only to learn but to learn about learning.”  (page 177)  One of those models discussed is the Brazilian Samba school.

The Brazilian Samba school model is fascinating to me.  Papert describes the samba school as a social organization that forms for a specific purpose (to perform in Rio’s carnival), is composed of a few hundred to a few thousand people of various ages, works together as collaboative co-learners to put together their performance.  In this post, I’m going to make a few comments about the samba school model and then try to come up with educational examples that may fit with the model.

The samba schools:

• Are voluntary.  It appears that people choose which (if any) of the various samba schools they want to be a part of.  This would appear to enhance intrinsic motivation.
• Allow for significant choice.  There are lots of tasks associated with preparing for the carnival… and it appears the members can choose which activities to be a part of.  Also an intrinsic motivator.
• Don’t allow for infinite individual choice.  The schools as a whole appear to set their goal, and then work together.  I assume an individual can’t change the direction of the whole group.  This fosters a sense of community and teamwork.
• Provide for intergenerational interaction / teaching / learning.  This wouldn’t always be just the adults telling the students how to do something.  I suspect the more mature sometimes rely on the younger to come up with and develop new ideas. 
• Provide for collaboration between novices and experts.
• Provide authentic tasks / learning experiences (making costumes, choreography, learning to dance, …) within a real-world context (preparing to perform in the next carnival).

OK, so my goals don’t include travelling to Rio to perform in the carnival.  I want to understand and encourage constructive thinking and learning using technology.  Are there educational programs available that include some of the attributes of the samba school?  Let’s do some brainstorming…

• IEEE Future City
• Botball
• After-school Computer Club (possibly with Logo Mindstorms / LCSI MicroWorlds)
• Saturday Computer Camp (possibly Scratch or NetLogo Programming)
• AECT’s ISMF (Association for Educational Communications and Technology International Student Media Festival).
• Maybe there could be an after-school or Saturday club to explore the use of various web 2.0 tools - like blogs.  However, I think this kind of task would be best situated within one of the other clubs.  For example, someone in a botball group may choose to blog about the progress of their project.  Or the IEEE Future City group may use a wiki to collaborate on the design of their city, …

All of the above are voluntary and I belieive will allow for the kinds of constructive efforts that Papert described in the samba school.  I also believe they would foster intrinsic motivation.  Future City and Botball are competitions with a pre-specified goal - very much like the samba schools.  ISMF is a competition but with many choices for products.  These competitions supply an overall goal and real-world context.  The computer club / computer camp ideas are more geared for individual exploration and goals - in these the individual would be setting their own goals.

Does anyone have experience with such clubs / competitions / festivals?  I’d love to hear your thoughts on them.

Now I’m sure I’ve missed some really good ones!  (For example, I know there’s a small school district in Canada that hosts an international media competition - but I don’t remember where it is!)  I’d love to hear from readers (assuming such people exist) with additional ideas.