Will Crichton

Elsewhere you mentioned units. That's not well-defined. The project itself has several courses. So I presume you're referring to a specific course: perhaps, most likely, Bootstrap:Algebra. »

WeScheme is of course employed by BS:A (our usual abbrev). But WeScheme was never intended to be stand-alone. It is open and public because why not, and the easier to access the less hassle for teachers (lots more I could say about classroom context). »

However, it doesn't make sense to evaluate it in its own right. It needs to be seen in the context of the curriculum it was designed for. Just as it doesn't make sense to look at Scratch and say "but there's no textbook here!". It has its own education philosophy. »

There is conscious thought behind this. We want students to actively engage rather than passively read. Copying improves retention. Also forces them to confront parts they may not understand: eg, if they can't make an example. Quick visual aid to teacher: blanks => ask! »

Obviously, there are different philosophies here. Scratch, for instance, has drawers. I love them: they're great for discovery. But also encourage random clicking around. That's a huge distraction *in our pedagogic context* (math teachers trying to improve math, limited time). »

Also, there's something to be said for sparsity. (A company in a circular building near your university has made a killing off of that.) Teachers get overwhelmed by many IDEs. Especially people not fluent in CS, or not trained in CS at all. Fewer buttons => less pain. »