Review the curriculum at: $ARGUMENTS
Instructions
- Read the curriculum index page at the specified path.
- Read every lesson linked from the curriculum.
- Read the prerequisite chain: for each lesson, read its prerequisites recursively until you reach lessons with no prerequisites.
- Read the style guide at
content/writing/texts/style-guide.md.
Curriculum-level criteria
Dependency structure
- Explicit prerequisites: Does each lesson state its prerequisites? Are the prerequisites specific about what is needed?
- Valid ordering: Can the lessons be completed in the stated order? Are there hidden dependencies (lesson B uses a concept only introduced in lesson C, but B comes before C)?
- No false linearity: Are independent lessons forced into a sequence? If lessons A and B have no dependency between them, does the curriculum present them as if B requires A?
- Shared dependencies: Are shared prerequisites identified? If lessons B and C both require lesson A, is this visible in the structure?
- Completeness: Does the dependency graph have gaps — concepts used in later lessons that are never introduced?
Scope
- Stated explicitly: Does the curriculum say what it covers and what it excludes?
- Honest about exclusions: Does it explain WHY things are excluded (not just “this is out of scope” but whose knowledge is centered and whose is not)?
- No false universality: Does the curriculum present its perspective as THE perspective, or does it name its tradition?
Individual lesson quality
For each lesson, apply the /review-lesson criteria. Summarize findings per lesson rather than repeating the full review.
Banking model indicators
Check the curriculum as a whole for these structural patterns:
- All information flows teacher → student with no exercises, worked examples, or opportunities for the learner to construct understanding
- Prerequisites are vague (“familiarity with X”) rather than specific and testable
- No scope statement — the curriculum presents itself as complete and neutral
- No sources cited — ideas appear to come from nowhere
- No acknowledgment of whose knowledge is centered
Coherence
- Consistent voice: Do the lessons use a consistent register and address the learner consistently?
- Progressive complexity: Does the curriculum build — each lesson adding capability that earlier lessons did not provide?
- Cross-references: Do later lessons reference earlier ones? Do earlier lessons point forward?
Output format
For each criterion category, report:
- Pass / Partial / Fail
- Specific evidence (file paths, line numbers, quoted text)
- Suggestions for improvement (if Partial or Fail)
Summary section: what the curriculum does well and what needs the most work.
Do not rewrite the curriculum. Report only.