There are people who organize life perfectly and others who are not so good at preparing the calendar. There are ways to live and think square and freer (or chaotic). Recognizing that different characters (at least to one point) have to be respected, it is increasingly necessary to plan life for everyone: work, leisure, friends, family. That is, where temporalization has become science or art itself, agendas, calendars and schedules are work instruments that, far from driving through space, organize time.

The teachers have always had to schedule our task, from the general perspective of the course, distribute tasks and contents, organize weekly the sequence of what to work in the classroom, etc. Plato himself in the Academy, the Aristotle in the Liceo or the Hypathies in the Serapeo, had to have a curriculum, although they, of course, could reach the class and talk about what they wanted without any kind of planning. But you have to be Plato or Aristotle or Hypatia in order to do that. It is clear that the activity of regulated education must be planned. We teachers not only approach subjects according to our own criteria, but we owe ourselves to a previously established curriculum. Planning must be coherent, initial, development, final, objective, methodology to achieve them, that kind of thing. And, of course, tools that enable us to assess whether we have met these objectives.

A part of pedagogy has been deepening to infinity in the beautiful art of programming, until losing the north. For some time we have been instructed to schedule correctly, but lately the matter has gone hand in hand, according to Sergio de Castro Sánchez in the newspaper El Salto. The degree of precision they intend to achieve is absurd. The millimetric prediction of how small we do in the classroom, the objectives (general, specific), the capacities (transversal, concrete), the problematic situations, the contents of knowledge, the skills, the evaluation criteria, the procedures... of each of the workshops we ask students, must be all interrelated and remote in the corresponding box, in the document, in the infinite and crazy excell.

It's too common: you mix media and ends. And there's a whole body of teachers, filling and assembling a lot of the working day, relentlessly, as the slaves of Ancient Rome put tiles of mosaics on each other, matching and matching colors and shapes according to the given scheme. Yes, there are differences between slave labor in Ancient Rome and ours: unlike them, we live and work inside the screen (who is the most slave? ); fruit of his work, the beautiful mosaics; ours, millions of PDF fragments hanging in the cloud.

The pedagogues that govern have forgotten that our task is not to program, but to teach. Programming should be an instrument (medium, resource) to improve our work, not a cancer that grows like a weed, eating much of the day. Let's remember what Borges narrated about that empire's Disproportionate Map: in search of perfection, local cartographers came to make a map of the size of the mapped territory, but a map of this kind was useless. In addition, we must inform the obsessed with the programming that in the classroom we must improvise frequently. Maps should help not to lose the north.