Responding to a message by Dan, to Ruth on ...
DT>In order for children to match the picture with the first letter they 
DT>would have to know the answer.
Or solve a problem, or research a question, or confer with a resource 
person, or visit the library, etc.  Perhaps you're thinking of only one 
type of worksheet - one with questions that involve only strict recall of 
facts.
DT>In other words, the matching doesn't _teach_ the skill.
Children do lots of things in school that don't involve primary 
instruction in a topic.  If we eliminated everything from school that 
wasn't instruction in a new topic, the kids would only need to show up 
for half-an-hour a day.
DT>For many children this type of activity is busy work and it's boring.
So is washing up the dinner dishes, but I do it every day.  As we close 
in on the beginning of school here (9/3), many teachers who borrowed 
computers for the summer are returning them.  I went into school 
yesterday, reset the network software on those machines and hooked 
everything back together.  I've done it dozens of times before and find 
it boring, but I did it - and even learned a little bit more about the 
computers since a few of the teachers really had the operating systems 
messed up .  Just because something is boring doesn't mean it can be 
eliminated from the educational process.
DT>For example, if I want a "match the letter to the picture" I can find 
DT>computer games that will do that.
Don't you think that an electronic worksheet is still just a worksheet?  
I don't see the difference except that the computer has a little more 
color and sound.
DT>There are also games that come pre-made or ones teachers can make to 
DT>match letters to pictures. Alphabet boards are one such idea.  
Although this adds some variety, it seems to still represent drill and 
practice, which you said in a previous message, that you are opposed to. 
 Can you reconcile the conflict?
DT>Children love to manipulate materials.  Watch a child at play.  They can 
DT>sit for the longest periods fixing on the same activity.
And some times that can be a paper and pencil activity.
DT>But no matter, they are very interested in touching the "real" world and 
DT>not the world of a one dimensional piece of paper.  Learning must 
DT>related to real-world experiences in order for children to have 
DT>meaningful learning.  
I spend a good deal of my "real world" job of teaching working with 
one-dimensional pieces of paper.  Forms to fill out, grade books and 
plan books to maintain, assignments to correct, requests for computer 
classes to file, etc.  My father runs a community center for children 
and the elderly, and a good deal of his job is paper shuffling - 
requests for funding, letters to suppliers and supporters, minutes of 
the meetings, reviewing applications, etc.
My newspaper is one-dimensional pieces of paper, as is the book I am 
reading.  Dan, do you REALLY mean what you have written, do you simply 
have a prejudice against a style of teaching that runs so deep that 
you've let it cloud your objectivity?  I really don't think that a 
blanket denial of the value of worksheets is in the best interests of 
the children you teach.
DT>Yes!  Imagine conducting science experiments on work sheets!  "Please 
DT>draw a line from the magnets to the objects that are ......"  Better to 
DT>give the child a magnet, clips, nails, toothpicks, rock, paper, etc,,,,, 
DT>and let them *Discover* the answer. 
DT>
DT>**Save paper -- Save a tree**
Paper (recyclable) and trees are renewable resources - the plastic we 
put on and in computers, or alphabet boards, is often not recoverable 
and is filling our dumps and polluting our environment.
Chuck Beams
Fidonet - 1:2608/70
cbeams@future.dreamscape.com
___
* UniQWK #5290* Do people rap on your head and say "Hello? Anybody home?"
--- Maximus 2.01wb
---------------