Polygon-first curriculum

Another idea that came up in conversation with @alphalambda and LSU's people.

Currently, we introduce things in effectively this order:

1. Rectangles and circles and text
2. Transformations, especially translation.
3. Top-down design
4. Polygons, arcs, and sectors

Instead, they are starting with polygons and the coordinate plane, and then introducing other shapes and transformations. The advantage is that it gives students something concrete and numerical to think about, as opposed to the very abstract idea of a picture. When students study translation, they can see how it actually changes the coordinates of each vertex of the polygon, and then build their understanding of how it operates on the whole shape on that foundation. It also delays the need to introduce transformations, which are their own sticking point for students.

I'm not at all clear on how this would go, but it's worth thinking about.

Inizia esaminando la sequenza del curriculum descritta in questa issue e le lezioni esistenti che introducono le forme, le trasformazioni e la progettazione top-down. Determina se una progressione polygon-first è definita in modo sufficientemente chiaro da poter essere implementata; il lavoro sarà considerato completato quando saranno definiti un ordine concordato delle lezioni e un ambito concreto, non solo la proposta di prendere in considerazione questa possibilità.

Scritto dal modello di indicizzazione a partire dal testo della issue.