[Edu-sig] Low Enrollments - programming as anti-intellectualism

[Arthur]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kirby Urner [mailto:urnerk at qwest.net]
> Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2005 1:12 AM
> To: 'Arthur'
> Cc: edu-sig at python.org
> Subject: RE: [Edu-sig] Low Enrollments - programming as anti-
> intellectualism
> 
> I develop curriculum for a more screen intensive lifestyle.  Computers and
> digicams are a given.  Yes, lack of physical exercise is sometimes a
> problem
> and needs to be addressed.  Using screens a lot doesn't preclude that.

Good for developing hand eye coordination, I've been told.  Of course my
instincts, when I have been told that,  has been to look to find a way to
defy physical reality, and reach through cyberspace, to go one on one with
the source of that assertion - feeling confident that I can hold my own
against anybody getting their exercise with their favorite HCI device.
> 
> Don't paint me as trying to force my curriculum down your throat.  I don't
> have any investment in making you do as I do.  I'm a recruiter, yes, but
> that doesn't mean I think others have no rights to the same field.  I'm
> here
> to compete.  I relish competition.  I don't *want* to be the only game in
> town (I'd *hate* that).

I have no doubt as to your sincerity and integrity.  

Moat importantly because I have seen it in action  - among other things,
defending my right to express myself here despite the extent you might
disagree with both my message and the manner in which it is sometimes
delivered.

I relish fair competition as well.

But you cannot ask me to ignore the fact that there are financial forces at
work on your side of the aisle that value winning more than fair
competition.  And it is even more complicated than that - the *job* of these
financial forces is to win.  I am not one to condemn anyone for doing their
job.  But it is the job of publicly funded educational institutions to bring
the argument back to one fought purely on its merits. So I have no problem 
going into attack dog mode when I don't see *that* job being adequately
performed - it being important that *everybody* concerned do their job.

In truth, there is more naivety, awe and ignorance than corruption at work,
in my view, that is distorting outcomes. Indeed, some of the technology we
are discussing is in fact awe-inspiring.  But while being the world's
leading proponent of Naïve Programming, I am nonetheless not a proponent of
naïve public administration.      

> 
> The future is nothing if not surprising, always.

I would be surprised if you are wrong, here.

Art