Either that, or getting a Ph.D. in Education.
Either that, or getting a Ph.D. in Education.
If you think you've been a poor fit at some companies, you ain't seen nothing yet.
Education departments attract some of the very worst students, people pathologically stricken with know-nothingness. The graduate schools then take the more craven among them, the ones that realize that their school-system contracts give them huge automatic raises for getting higher degrees, often paid for too. They often come out as worse teachers after having had the recently recycled fad pedagogies pumped through them, which they then regurgitate in a game of telephone onto their students.
If you want to work on some stellar CS education stuff, try to talk your way into Kay's VPRI. Stay the hell away from Ed schools, they'd make your blood boil.
The rest is far, far worse.
Say what you like about the tenets of Constructivism, Zed, at least it's an ethos. I'm surprised that you'd have beef with it — you don't even like Papert's Constructionism?
As easily misinterpreted and misapplied as liberation pedagogy can be, at least it gives the non-subject-matter-experts something to apply themselves at, something they could actually help children with even if they're as dumb as a bag of rocks. It's definitely not a good fit for you, but it's far from worthless.
DI does have it's merits — it does keep bright assholes like us from dominating the classroom as students in a mixed setting. You can also get through the material a lot faster without getting mired in repetitive interactivity, but the script has to be perfect, or you can skip past a crucial facet without noticing, and there's very little opportunity to get back on the rails, especially because from the lecturer's perspective the resulting complaints are difficult to distinguish from the usual whining.
Part of the problem with curriculum design is that trials generally only occur with either uniformly high-achieving or uniformly delinquent students, both of whom can abide nearly any method if it's intentionally delivered.
Is this a Heinlein reference?
> "killer apps" are for mongrel2
You just said it. Bypassing any connection limitations on the browser.
Operations guy: Mongrel2 is a ops wet dream. Totally automatable and you can use it to easily carve your infrastructure up as needed to scale and deal with all the random crap programmers throw at you.
Programmers: Mongrel2 is future proof and gives you want you need with low friction. Wanna do sockets? Got it. Use any language? Got it. Change up the request flow to work around a bug? Got it. Drop Scala for Rails? Got it.
Or something like that.
I'm not even sure what that would produce. Maybe a post-post-modern _why.
I'm not that jazzed about the idea of reminiscing about a Smalltalk. How about instead of making esoteric references, you just say what's on your mind?
This is a thread, not a bibliography.
> This is a thread, not a bibliography.
What is that supposed to mean?