Xref: utzoo comp.edu:3885 sci.edu:1119 misc.education:1271 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!shakti!mickey From: mickey@ncst.ernet.in (R Chandrasekar) Newsgroups: comp.edu,sci.edu,misc.education Subject: Re: Against educational fads (was: math credit) Message-ID: <1168@shakti.ncst.ernet.in> Date: 10 Dec 90 17:34:31 GMT References: <15404@cs.utexas.edu> <15425@cs.utexas.edu> Reply-To: mickey@ncst.ernet.in (R Chandrasekar) Followup-To: comp.edu Organization: National Centre for Software Technology, Bombay, INDIA Lines: 36 In article <15425@cs.utexas.edu> turpin@cs.utexas.edu (Russell Turpin) writes: >----- >In article freewill@nstar.UUCP (Bill Williston) writes: >> aren't writing skills and word processing synonymous in 1990? > >No. No. No. Not the slightest bit. [ ... ] I do agree that writing skills and word processing are not in any way synonymous. But I do think there is some merit in using packages to improve, for example, language use. Take the WWB set of programs on Unix machines - in particular: spell, style and diction. These programs can be used to sensitize people to proper spelling, high readability and reasonable language use. Of course, one should not take the output of these programs as absolute truth. Use them to locate 'weak' points, and use other methods to fix these points. So, if you bundle together a set of packages, and have interesting exercises, where you use the packages to critique your efforts, you have the beginnings of a course. The key thing, I guess, is that you get feedback on your creative efforts, something that a large class cannot usually expect from a human tutor. > But even after these are obsolete, it will still be >important to know how to put together a sentence. Teach this >first. By all means, yes. And do consider using well-designed systems to reinforce what you teach. -- Chandrasekar