I am glad I didn’t read what you wrote correctly.
There are a couple of issues with changing up the programming assignments.
The first is the Unit 5 Hackathon. I think this is the most egregious. Our students are given a project that helps them get ready for the AP Create Task. There are written responses designed to mimic the Create Task written sections. To finish in the time given the project requirements are fit for the purpose. It focuses right down on using a list. That’s it. There are no changes to make. Any program grabbed off the Internet that uses a list will pretty much fit. Or at least make a student try using it as such. Adding requirements on top, even small affects the schedule and increases the chance that students won’t even attempt it. So I don’t see any good way to change that.
The next issue is with the sequenced levels or bubbles as some say. Those are designed in order to teach something specific. They build on each other and are pilot class tested to fit in 45 minute lessons. Substituting an assignment that should be comparable but takes the students much longer can blow your schedule out of existence. To some extent, code.org checks to see if the level was completed changing the assignment could be a problem. Plus, the instructions are very tightly integrated into the assignments. I don’t see a clean way to change that and still use the code.org interface.
I did challenge a student to finish Unit 7 lesson 4 without using any if
statements nor loops of any kind. But you do that kind of thing with an advanced student who isn’t going to copy from the Internet in the first place.
For some teachers they are learning as the students are learning. They are certified to teach math or science and now they must teach computer science. They are not advanced enough in their own knowledge base to create alternate assignments. They often rely on the example solutions code.org gives them and would be hard pressed to make things up.
And that assumes they have time. I don’t know about other school districts, but the one I volunteer at is having a problem keeping teachers. With COVID-19 many have chosen to just retire. Some teachers are in the position of having to teach classes they have not taught before or in a long time. That puts a huge strain on how much time they can devote to any one class’s preparation.
So what I am saying is that following a curriculum is very attractive and almost universal. Code.org is formatted to be very attractive to teachers who have never taught computer science before. Those two circumstances conspire to make it difficult for teachers to just switch up the assignments.
Even if it was easy to change assignments there is the overreaching issue of investment. Code.org has a large investment of people and money in and of itself. But then individual teachers spend time and money to train in the curriculum through Professional Development (PD) and time with the materials. That is a huge human investment. We have people spend time in this forum requesting changes, pointing out bugs, and helping other teachers. All totaled that is an irreplaceable amount of investment in this curriculum.
Mr. Kaiser makes money from ruining that investment. His code.org spoilers get close to 90k views. His other instruction videos get just over 1k. He is being rewarded for leveraging that priceless investment for his own enrichment. It is a parasitic relationship. That should make everyone angry.