[Edu-sig] Lets work on the adgenda

Dustin James Mitchell djmitche@cs.uchicago.edu
Fri, 11 Feb 2000 15:46:24 -0600 (CST)

<agenda mode="on">
OK then.  I propose we take a hierarchical approach to our agenda, then.
We have as our current structure the following:

I. New & Improved Tools
  1. IDLE
  2. Language changes

II. Curricular Development

The questions are:

(a) Should we split the SIG along these lines?
(b) How should we subdivide (II) above?
<agenda mode="off">

Now, my opinions:

(a) I think that, for the benefit of discussion crossover, we should
keep the two discussions in the same forum, at least until the email
load gets unbearable.

(b) I have two thoughts on subdividing II: 

- Divide it by age (PS-K, 1-2, 3-4, 5-6, 7-8, 9-10, 11-12, college,
adult); or
- Divide it by material type (books, teaching aids, lesson plans,
teacher education resources, sample assignments, etc.)

Although in light of Mr. Urner's recent post, perhaps we need to first
distinguish the dimension of purpose: math, math/cs, cs, or programming?

Comments are welcome.

Guido: if I set up some sort of web page to track development of our
agenda and work done on it, can I get a link to it from the SIG page?


|                         Dustin Mitchell                )O(        |