kfklein15
commented
7 months ago I think this feedback is valid for all times. Thanks, Sally.
Open SallyMcGrath opened 9 months ago
kfklein15
commented
7 months ago I think this feedback is valid for all times. Thanks, Sally.
What type of request is it
https://github.com/CodeYourFuture/Module-JS1/issues/36
As discussed in the Slack channel, on the curriculum repo, and with Karen, the times given for PD coursework are sometimes unrealistic for B2 speakers. We accept B2 English speakers. This means a reading speed of 80-100 WPM with around 60% comprehension at the beginning of the course. It takes much longer than a fluent speaker to read and understand any text.
In Tech Ed we give three hours to challenging texts that take a fluent speaker fifteen minutes to read. We write mainly at a Grade 6 level or below. We produce videos alongside as support. That's about an hour to read and two hours to comprehend the new information. (And we still get it wrong a lot!)
To this end, an example of coursework that is going way way over time, and has some other problems too.
https://github.com/CodeYourFuture/Module-JS1/issues/36
One hour is given to read two texts, write a complex, multipart text, then read two more texts and review them.
Unfortunately, the given reading is low quality (one is a Linkedin article) and have many sentences rated as hard or very hard to read. The given texts have limited relevance to the subsequent questions or the trainee's current experience of code review. So the reading here is likely making the work more difficult.
There is a text on code review already in the curriculum that I recommend https://phauer.com/2018/code-review-guidelines/ . It is relevant, useful, and written at grade 6 level. This text is long and would take at least one hour for a B2 speaker to read and understand. I would set this several times over the course: first just reading, then a re-read and reflection, then a re-read and revision. For B2 speakers, familiarity with texts is key to accessing deeper analytic engagement.
The writing assignment covers three topics with four reflection points to be considered. The questions, which ask them to imagine a new applicant and write to them would take more than one hour, without the associated reading.
Then they must review and write feedback on other texts, which if they actually engaged with this, would take at least a further thirty minutes.
Overall this coursework would likely take around three to four hours, yet one is given. Consequently all the B2 speakers are submitting AI pablum and commenting "Great job" on each other's LLM nonsense. This is somewhat a rational decision on their part, as they have no chance of completing the assignment in the time given. Ultimately, it's a mistake, of course, and I've put that to them in class, but we are also making a mistake here.
I hope this feedback is useful. If it helps, we make this mistake over and over in Tech Ed. And I was just reading Twenty Terrible Reasons for Lecturing (1981) and he discusses the timing problem at length there. So it's all of us all the time.