# Topic Challenge #2 Winner and Challenge 3 Voting!

Our challenge of Topic Challenge #02: Being Selfish has received 2 entries:

So, congratulations to Michael0x2a for first place, and heather for second place!

Now, for our next one, we'll need suggestions for a challenge. So go ahead and suggest a challenge. Remember, you can suggest more than one, and they don't have to be a tag challenge.

## Topic Challenge #3: Work your body line

I see what you mean, but it makes no sense to me.

I hear what you're saying, but I just can't see it.

That just don't feel right to me, seems like there's something missing.

I Value what you're showing me.
I Apreciate what you're saying.
I Know what you're doing.

Can anyone help connect the dots? ... Maybe we need some to put this all together.

Sometime in the past, maybe back when we were learning how to teach, I'm sure we all learned about learning styles of one model or another. (My favorite is the VAK model, but others work as well.) Since then, seemingly, the emphasis has been on saying and showing. Now we have a question where showing becomes pointless, and most often our saying is linked to our showing anyway. In all that instruction, most of the kinesthetic "learning" happen when the students write notes, or type code.

In the early days, (oh sooo long ago, right?), we had some really good stuff about getting the students active in the learning. Then we lost our momentum, and now it seems to be all talk and little action.

I propose that we use as a base, but focus on the techniques that increase the use of kinesthetic learning strategies in the instruction set. Not just examples of activities (there's plenty of those to choose from on CS Unplugged), but how to actually integrate it into the whole of the teaching, and the testing.

This might also need some creative adjustments to the scoring, but I am not sure.

Work, work, work, Senora,
Work, work, work, Senora,
Work it all the time


Jump in the Line,, by Harry Belafonte

• Sounds like an interesting challenge :D Sep 4 '17 at 10:19
• I tried to keep it lively, at least. Sep 4 '17 at 10:20
• Actually, there is an active-learning tag already. It seems more specific to what you are suggesting. I think the tag needs more action anyway. (no pun intended). Sep 4 '17 at 12:27
• @Buffy Well, yes and no. As I understand the industry usage of active learning it can include, for example, a round-table discussion in chat. Not a very active activity in the kinesthetic sense. Although, by its nature, I think a kinesthetic activity would also qualify as _active learning. Mammals are animals, but animals may not be mammals. Sep 4 '17 at 16:58
• Learning styles have been basically discredited, so I recommend we don't couple kinesthetic learning with differentiation. Kinesthetic learning is a subset of active learning, and is useful enough in its own right, even without differentiation.
– Ben I. Mod
Sep 5 '17 at 15:41
• “And then we lost momentum” ☺@Beni I thought mostly discredited, except that using all styles, and not targeting them is the best (so basically the opposite of what was proposed by the styles movement). Sep 8 '17 at 8:14
• @BenI. should we build on this, or make a new "challenge 3" voting? May 27 '19 at 11:21
• @ItamarG3 isn't this what we tried last time?
– Ben I. Mod
May 27 '19 at 22:53
• @ItamarG3 If a new challenge is being considered, I think y'all ought to start a new meta question for it. This one is stale beyond compare. Just make a new meta post, featured of course, about what's wanted for suggestions, and what the goals, and guidelines, are. May 27 '19 at 23:56
• @GypsySpellweaver Great Idea. May 28 '19 at 5:23

Suggestion: a lot of the questions currently on this site are geared towards helping intro students. But what about non-intro students, and more advanced topics? (Things like compilers, distributed systems, networking, type systems, machine learning...)

Many of the more advanced topics can be challenging to explain and teach, so it'd be great if we could crowd-source either lesson ideas or explanations focusing on teaching these kinds of non-intro topics.

(Caveat: this idea is a bit unrefined, and probably could do with some polishing.)

Suggestion: questions that deal with any specific subfield of Artificial intelligence (Machine Learning, genetic algorithm etc.)

Should probably be tagged with and the subfield your using.

@Michael 42 suggested that questions are bias toward introductory.

While I would agree, if seen from a university perspective. I think that there is a bias toward university education. With some senior-school, and little to no infant-school or primary-school questions.

What can we do to encourage, questions about teaching younger people?

Definitions: UK England(may be different in other parts of UK)

• Infant school: age 4→7 (years reception, 1,2) Keystage 1
• Primary school: age 7→11 (years 3→6) Keystage 2
• Secondary school age 11→19 (years 7→13) Keystage 3, 4, 5
• Keystage 1 and 2 has non-specialist teachers. However not unusual to have a few specialists.
• Keystage 3, 4, 5 has specialist teachers.
• Keystage 4, 5 pupils only study subjects to which they will be doing an exam.
• Keystage 5 non-compulsory education, usually only 3 subjects.
• Based on perspective that higher-level introductory type questions have the decided edge, and that Keystages lower than 5, or 4, seem to be sparsely represented, what would you propose as the actual challenge? Sep 8 '17 at 8:35

Questions seem to be bias toward Computer science. What about the other areas, that we teach in the UK: IT, and digital literacy?

• That might be branching out too far from our target. IT and digital literacy questions, so far, have had mixed reception, verging on flat denial. This might be better discussed (hashed out) in meta and/or chat, before a topic challenge focuses on them. Sep 8 '17 at 8:38