Processing
I started 'processing' a few days ago and have had a heck of a time trying to get the 'processing' software integrated with the Android SDK - at the moment I have it connected to my Android by not the 'emulator'. But, back on track.
From an education perspective the Coursera course is free and I think very well presented. See here.
Because I started one week late I have had a problem catching up, especially with the software issues. But, it isn't just me and the organisers are getting a bit of flak from students for using a software that appears pretty 'buggie'. But, apart from that it appears a pretty good course, and I'd recommend it.
What I would like to do is create interactive education products for mobile use using text, words and art. That's the goal, and as a teacher it's also an interesting way to present subject matter. I teach English, and the content from mainstream publishing is pretty darn boring. No, real art, very little use of font and text, poetry, or sound - so, it is no surprise many students struggle. They´re not engaged, it isn't fun, and they're not learning another skill.
If 'processing' were to be integrated into an English course for example, students would use the Processing.org software as a 'toolbox' which would in turn make the idea of learning a language much more proactive, interactive and fun. It's called Content Integrated Language Learning, where they sign up to learn English, but, in the 'process' they learn some creative programming as well. Creating art, apps, and sharing them without fear of criticism.
Many of the students on the course are having problems keeping up, as am I. So, the instructors reduced the value of the first assessment by 10 percent. They are also using 'peer' assessment which is interesting. But, the need for assessment still puzzles me a little. Who is it for and what does it acheive? I understand 'feedback' but 'assessment' is troubling to me.
The end of the course offers a certificate - if you pay. Why offer one, only if you pay?
The value of any course is the portfolio a student is left with, the friends they make and the foundation they build for work. It shouldn't be diminished by the education establishment offering certificates - 'if you pay'. That's a rort. Judging whether the work is any good or not - is for the market to decide. Not the educator. The educator can offer advice and opinion, but not 'judgements' based around a mark or assessment. That gets the educator into tricky ground of being 'all knowing'. Creativity comes from breaking the rules not adhering to them, yet a student is penalized if they do and attributed a C, or D. Ridiculous.
All a certificate does is promote the school and allow them to collect money be it from the student or the government. It's a tool used to 'stack rank' students. To 'test' one has to offer a certificate or degree. But, without the piece of paper no assessment or testing is required. The classroom becomes holistic. Students study at their own pace without threat. Some learning quickly, and others not. But, that's allowing for a natural process to flourish - what isn't natural is associating intelligence with time frames, assessments and certificates.