Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bret Victor: Learnable Programming

worrydream.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 193 posts

Re: Bret Victor: Learnable Programming

#161

Post by ygra »

neilk wrote: post #121
dxbydt wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bret has written an amazing article, but the world he inhabits is soooooooooo far away I can't ever imagine getting there in my lifetime. As it stands, programming is barely 2-3 levels of abstraction above shoving bits in registers...sometimes even those few layers are slowing us down and we have to resort to bit shifting operators and native code every once in a while. Whereas he is talking about 20-30 layers of abs…

I don't think that Bret is advocating that this is the way all programming should be. That would be strictly impossible, as some functions have totally non-linear effects on their output, so you couldn't easily connect one to the other with handy arrows and highlighted stuff. The geometry example is chosen because it's easy to make a mapping between the space of function inputs and visual outputs. And each parameter…

Java's documentation, while allowing to document each parameter, still doesn't make the actual result of changing a parameter obvious to a program.

In Bret's video, where hovering over a parameter would show what exactly would change – that requires either machine-readable metadata (i.e. x position of top-left corner of the shape) or additional programming to make available. Javadoc as it exists is just a semi-structured and very thin wrapper around HTML. Not really much a computer could do anything with.

The general problem I see with Bret's approach, while it works very well for restricted programming environments intended for beginners and learners, it falls short for more complex things. But then again, those of us who know half the language framework by heart anyway won't probably need as much guidance or fiddling around. Still, it requires augmenting each and every function with a piece of visualisation code or enough metadata so a development environment can apply the visualisation itself.

Re: Bret Victor: Learnable Programming

#162

Post by joelhooks »

mattmcknight wrote: post #111
bretthopper wrote: post #24

There's already two comments here about being "harsh" or "ungracious" towards Khan Academy which is ridiculous. The usual HN article that contains criticisms is usually limited to that. Some rant that took 10 minutes to write and contains nothing constructive. Bret Victor put an insane amount of time into this (I can only assume) and is truly advancing mindsets about programming tools and learning. We should all be t…

I just found the analogy of a microwave with blank buttons turned me off as being an unnecessary rhetorical straw man. I know what fill means, and I know what ellipse means, and I know what numbers are. Discovering what those words mean in a different context is not analogous to blank buttons.

Sure you do, but I send my kids to KA. To assume a student knows what an ellipse is and what it means to fill it is a leap.

Re: Bret Victor: Learnable Programming

#163

Post by jiaaro »

I think the analogy of looking at a book for it's words is somewhat misguided.

Judging a book by the words it contains is wrong if you're judging literature, but when you're choosing books to teach with, you have to consider the readers vocabulary.

In practice, choosing a book based on it's words is, in fact, quite common when you're teaching english.

Re: Bret Victor: Learnable Programming

#164

Post by russelluresti »

kamaal wrote: post #129
russelluresti wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Brett Victor is pointing out what he perceives to be valid flaws Where are the numbers? Where's the testing? Where's the proof that his proposed changes are more effective in teaching a new programmer? Validity comes through numbers, proof, and evidence.

You could say say something similar about UI design of things like iPhone. Some times you have to show people what they want. And then when they see, they would know how awesome things are. Not all projects are started after research and data. That way many projects would never start.

This doesn't make sense, because the UI design of the iPhone WAS tested. They did a ton of research into their solutions. They did exactly the type of testing I'm advocating.

Re: Bret Victor: Learnable Programming

#165

Post by russelluresti »

ArekDymalski wrote: post #160
russelluresti wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Brett Victor is pointing out what he perceives to be valid flaws Where are the numbers? Where's the testing? Where's the proof that his proposed changes are more effective in teaching a new programmer? Validity comes through numbers, proof, and evidence.

You can find proof in numerous publications from related fields like cognitive psychology and pedagogy. But don't expect the author to gather them for you. He already did amazing job.

I disagree with the idea that proof of those concepts translates perfectly across all situations. You have to test something before you know if it works or not.

Re: Bret Victor: Learnable Programming

#166

Post by russelluresti »

ht_th wrote: post #133
russelluresti wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Brett Victor is pointing out what he perceives to be valid flaws Where are the numbers? Where's the testing? Where's the proof that his proposed changes are more effective in teaching a new programmer? Validity comes through numbers, proof, and evidence.

That's a positivist perspective on research and knowledge. While your perspective on validity might be fitting for quantitative research, for an exploratory expose and kinds of qualitative research some look for other measures of validity and quality. There is an enormous amount of research (papers) on this topic, just look for "qualitative research validity". As it is more a matter of perspective, there often seem s…

I'm well aware of qualitative research, but he doesn't even have that. And, while I agree that you can translate and interpret the major themes, all you have done at that point is recognize that you have a similar problem and have formed a hypothesis that needs to be tested. You cannot assume that your method of fixing the identified problem will actually work until it is tested.

Re: Bret Victor: Learnable Programming

#167

Post by russelluresti »

readymade wrote: post #143
russelluresti wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's my issue with the "advancement" that Bret is doing. It's all conjecture. He has no product. He has no users. He has theories. Theories that sound good to you and me, but, ultimately, theories that are untested and unproven. There's no evidence that any of these changes would actually help anyone learn to program any better. Who is to say that a person new to coding wouldn't be overwhelmed by the amount of info…

Khan Academy and Bret Victor are apples and oranges -- they're not even playing the same game. In order to make any major strides, we have to reconcile the need for PRODUCTS, NOW! with the conceptual, exploratory approach taken here. Real world innovation often makes very small tweaks on proven formulae, whereas bold new ideas can have a long incubation period with seemingly little payoff at first. It's roughly the d…

I disagree that real-world innovation isn't tested, iterated on, and improved. Look at flight and the Wright Brothers. They didn't just run numbers and present ideas. They built prototypes and tested their assumptions. That's what Bret needs to do. He needs to build, test, iterate, and improve upon his ideas.

Re: Bret Victor: Learnable Programming

#168

Post by russelluresti »

russelluresti wrote: post #124
AdamFernandez wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, and would add that Brett Victor is pointing out what he perceives to be valid flaws with the method Khan Academny uses to teach programming (live coding environments, javascript, and processing languages, which other teaching products happen to use as well). He is not criticizing Khan Academy as a whole directly, as the quality or lack thereof of Khan Academy itself is never brought into question or even dis…

> Brett Victor is pointing out what he perceives to be valid flaws Where are the numbers? Where's the testing? Where's the proof that his proposed changes are more effective in teaching a new programmer? Validity comes through numbers, proof, and evidence.

It's amazing how many people have a problem with the idea of testing a solution. I'm simply saying that assumptions need to be challenged and assertions need data to back them up. I'm not saying any of this ideas are inherently wrong, I'm saying they're unproven.

If you down-vote simply because I believe a person should offer proof when they make a claim, you're falling victim to your own biases.

Re: Bret Victor: Learnable Programming

#169

Post by c141charlie »

russelluresti wrote: post #164
kamaal wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could say say something similar about UI design of things like iPhone. Some times you have to show people what they want. And then when they see, they would know how awesome things are. Not all projects are started after research and data. That way many projects would never start.

This doesn't make sense, because the UI design of the iPhone WAS tested. They did a ton of research into their solutions. They did exactly the type of testing I'm advocating.

I often hear people talk up how the iPhone was never tested in usability labs with non-apple employees. Then I hear that the iPhone was heavily tested.

What actually happened? Does anyone know definitively whether or not it was tested by non-Apple employees before launch?

Re: Bret Victor: Learnable Programming

#170

Post by ht_th »

russelluresti wrote: post #166
ht_th wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a positivist perspective on research and knowledge. While your perspective on validity might be fitting for quantitative research, for an exploratory expose and kinds of qualitative research some look for other measures of validity and quality. There is an enormous amount of research (papers) on this topic, just look for "qualitative research validity". As it is more a matter of perspective, there often seem s…

I'm well aware of qualitative research, but he doesn't even have that. And, while I agree that you can translate and interpret the major themes, all you have done at that point is recognize that you have a similar problem and have formed a hypothesis that needs to be tested. You cannot assume that your method of fixing the identified problem will actually work until it is tested.

True. On the other hand, it allows the professional/expert to have a good idea if it might work. And, if so, if it is worth testing out or not. In my opinion the value of this kind of research and/or informed opinion pieces is local in scope and should be treated as such. Don't base your educational policy on this kind of research, for that you'd better look for quantitative and, preferably, longitudinal studies.
Post reply on HN