2/2 Joey: Discovery with diSessa

I would say that in Nersessian’s paper every single one of these practices were prominently involved throughout the research.  The researchers had a question about neurons and defined a problem to solve.  How can we use technology to build and better understand “a living neural network”?  They developed multiple models (conceptual, physical, computational) to help represent the phenomena and system in question.  They planned and carried out many investigations, analyzed the data and made tweaks to fix problems.  Math and computational thinking were involved in the construction of models and designing solutions.  The researchers were constantly constructing explanations and designing solutions.  Along the way they would use data and other resources to argue using evidence.  As many different researchers came together to complete the solution; they obtained, evaluated, and communicated information to each other along the way.  Also, by having this research published, this information was communicated to me as well.

diSessa describes many ideas about computational literacy and many aspects line up with Nersessian’s account of scientific modeling. Just as Nersessian documents the use of computational models, diSessa feels these models can be extremely useful as well. diSessa also mentions, “Programing turns analysis into experience and allows a connection between analytic forms and their experiential implications that algebra and even calculus can’t touch” (diSessa pg. 40).  Just as Nersessian notes how these models can be used to observe and investigate phenomena the human eye can’t clearly see, diSessa notes the same advantages.  diSessa also points out how computational literacy involves scientific inquiry and leads to discovery.  In both cases computational literacy is viewed as something that will allow one to investigate a phenomena, create a representation, develop a model, gather data, make revisions, argue through evidence, and communicate findings to others.  diSessa really sees this new type of literacy as the future and a truly unique opportunity for the community to grow.

diSessa clears up some of the questions I had previously about to what extent teachers would have to be familiar with computers and new language to be successful at teaching this new literacy.  When diSessa writes, “I am taking computer programming languages to be a material form for a hypothetical new literacy, and I’m assuming that programming is within the grasp of elementary school students” (diSessa pg. 34), it becomes clear that I need not worry of being fluent in binary code and some of the more advanced computer languages.  Also, after seeing how each student in our class came up with a unique way to represent uniform acceleration, I more clearly see how the possibilities for creativity can be endless.