noelwelsh · July 7, 2020 09:19
diff --git a/thoughts.txt b/thoughts.txt
 The original poster said they wanted to construct a curriculum to become a "web artist and/or use code or electronics to create art".

 In well established fields there are reasonably well established expectations as to what a curriculum involves. E.g. for computing there is an accreditation body (https://dev.csab.org/info-for/programs/) and widely agreed upon curriculum guidelines (e.g. https://www.acm.org/education/curricula-recommendations). So there is reasonably widely shared understanding of what someone undertaking, say, a computer science degree should learn. Computing is interesting because there are so many new alternate routes such as bootcamps but even here I think they are informed by the above (e.g. https://github.com/Ada-Developers-Academy/textbook-curriculum has elements that would be found in almost all university curriculums)

 I believe "creative computing", or whatever we want to call OP's goal, is different. It's defined by the output (e.g. "creative application of computing") more than by a shared body of knowledge. I also don't see well established norms about what a practitioner should know. 

 Let's take creative electronics. What is the core knowledge? Perhaps Ohm's law? Almost certainly some applied skills like soldering and stripping wires. What about analyzing circuits? Do they need to know about impedance, or perhaps even quantum physics?

 One way to answer this to look at the goal but I don't find that very helpful. If your goal is to create blinking lights you can get very far with Ohm's law and a solder gun. If your goal is to fabricate a haptic interface you need very different knowledge. (Maybe chip fabrication? Industrial design? Some physics? I don't really know.) Another way to answer this is to that a person learning creative electronics should know the things that those established in the field would expect you to know (this is the approach with computer science above). However I don't see this shared understanding in the field. I can't point to a group of people and say "you should know what these people say you should know". My belief is that the field is not established to the point where there is this shared understanding.

 I see the same thing with creative coding. What's the core knowledge, beyond some knowledge of coding? Should everyone know how to create a flocking algorithm? Or understand 3D maths? Or know how to train a neural network? I don't know.

 Finally, what is the intersection of creative electronics and creative coding? You can boil both down to maths, but that's not really satisfactory. For a start the maths is quite different. Creative computing is also about application, which brings many important details (e.g. soldering for electronics). Finally I don't think the practitioners are that interested in the maths, beyond what it allows them to achieve, so going maths first is likely to turn off a lot of people.

 That's why I find it difficult to define a curriculum for creative computing.
	The original poster said they wanted to construct a curriculum to become a "web artist and/or use code or electronics to create art".

	In well established fields there are reasonably well established expectations as to what a curriculum involves. E.g. for computing there is an accreditation body (https://dev.csab.org/info-for/programs/) and widely agreed upon curriculum guidelines (e.g. https://www.acm.org/education/curricula-recommendations). So there is reasonably widely shared understanding of what someone undertaking, say, a computer science degree should learn. Computing is interesting because there are so many new alternate routes such as bootcamps but even here I think they are informed by the above (e.g. https://github.com/Ada-Developers-Academy/textbook-curriculum has elements that would be found in almost all university curriculums)

	I believe "creative computing", or whatever we want to call OP's goal, is different. It's defined by the output (e.g. "creative application of computing") more than by a shared body of knowledge. I also don't see well established norms about what a practitioner should know.

	Let's take creative electronics. What is the core knowledge? Perhaps Ohm's law? Almost certainly some applied skills like soldering and stripping wires. What about analyzing circuits? Do they need to know about impedance, or perhaps even quantum physics?

	One way to answer this to look at the goal but I don't find that very helpful. If your goal is to create blinking lights you can get very far with Ohm's law and a solder gun. If your goal is to fabricate a haptic interface you need very different knowledge. (Maybe chip fabrication? Industrial design? Some physics? I don't really know.) Another way to answer this is to that a person learning creative electronics should know the things that those established in the field would expect you to know (this is the approach with computer science above). However I don't see this shared understanding in the field. I can't point to a group of people and say "you should know what these people say you should know". My belief is that the field is not established to the point where there is this shared understanding.

	I see the same thing with creative coding. What's the core knowledge, beyond some knowledge of coding? Should everyone know how to create a flocking algorithm? Or understand 3D maths? Or know how to train a neural network? I don't know.

	Finally, what is the intersection of creative electronics and creative coding? You can boil both down to maths, but that's not really satisfactory. For a start the maths is quite different. Creative computing is also about application, which brings many important details (e.g. soldering for electronics). Finally I don't think the practitioners are that interested in the maths, beyond what it allows them to achieve, so going maths first is likely to turn off a lot of people.

	That's why I find it difficult to define a curriculum for creative computing.