[Edu-sig] On the front page

[Arthur Siegel]

The front page article in todays New York Times on the controversy
surrounded the nations
math curriculum probably does not tell many of us anything which we don't
much well know.

Other than the fact - as Kirby has told us from the trenches - that the
controversy is moving
to center stage as a cultural and political issue.

We should appreciate, I think, that these issues cannot be avoided, are in
fact core to, what
EDU-SIG discussion is necessarily about, if it going to have any real
seriousness.  If we feel
it necessary to avoid controversy here, there is little that can be said.
And little in fact is
being said.

I have taken a position.  And descended into polemics.

The Alice dissertation distributed as part of its documentation describes
clearly its goals
and intent.  A VR system with maximum flexibility and minimum 'cognitive
load'.  Python is used
as part of its strategy. It's simple and gets things done - VR things.
Python is being used
appropriately for something it is well designed to handle and anyone who
likes Python should
like that. I do.

Now education.

Inspiration of students to undertake the maximum cognitive load within their
capabilities. I believe
that Python could have an extremely important role in a curriculum designed
to do just that.
Which is why I'm here.

The fact that the phrase 'minimum cognitive load' anywhere within a hundred
miles of an educational
project sends shivers down my spine, is not something I can find a way of
backing away from, especially
in the context of the surrounding controversy.

Yet to anyone who sees it differently, or who finds my approach in the
discussion of this issue
unnecessarily specific, agressive or heavy-handed, I do apologize.