Hi Carl,
CB--> CB> with were frustrated
CB--> CB> with LOGO and saw little purpose in it.  Perhaps,
CB--> CB> I saw it as a very dry topic.
I  recall playing with it 8 years ago during a "Computers in the
Classroom" course  I enjoyed it , but I remember there being a
substantial effort at first to find it interesting. Then it became fun.
The teacher I took it with saw no utility (neither did I at that time)
and found it stressful.
CB-->SK>But I can see presenting some very fun
CB-->SK>lessons in Logo (there are many activity books
CB-->SK>available through the
CB-->SK>Logo Foundation) that would (hopefully?) grab the kids' attention.
    The web site is great too as Shelia said. There are links to so much
  there , I spent over an hour just surfin and barely touched the
  surface.
CB--> CB> Well, you'll have to try it and see what you think.
CB--> CB>  All I can tell you
CB--> CB> is, given our circumstances and inclinations, we no longer teach 
.
 It's Cause for pause to me, I wonder how Shelia's class will like
 it. They will be older than my kids.
CB-->I would tend to think that LOGO could be very dry, I think that the
CB-->addition of robots could have made quite a difference. Practical uses
CB-->abound for robotic applications in the work world, Logo is a very good
CB-->robotic language for beginners. IMHO
        Have you tried the robots? how do they work?
      Are they expensive?
Peace
Bob
---
 * SLMR 2.1a * Backup not found: (A)bort (R)etry (P)anic
--- WILDMAIL!/WC v4.12 
---------------