Seymour Papert once argued that educational curricula should be evaluated like art — don’t try to identify the best, but instead argue about how well this example expresses something, or how accessible another one is, or how another one leaves people thinking and talking for years later. Compare curricula for how they reach and engage people, not for a measurable, numeric bottom line. Wouldn’t it be great to have so many compelling CS1 curricula that we could have a CS1 “art gallery” and compare them along the lines Seymour described?
- education-is-to-social-work-as-civil-engineering-is-to-chemical-engineering
Trying to get language models to reveal secrets in Machine Learning for Kids
-
I worked on a new “Secret Keeper” worksheet for Machine Learning for Kids
this weekend. The idea was to give the model a password it had to keep
secret, an...
1 hour ago
1 comment:
This is essentially the reason I like Understanding by Design. It actually gives you a fairly artful way of thinking about curriculum. AND administrators actually like it too.
Post a Comment