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

Learn to Code, It's Harder Than You Think

mikehadlow.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 197 posts

Re: Learn to Code, It's Harder Than You Think

#131

Post by learc83 »

jdiez17 wrote: post #120
learc83 wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I went to back to University after working after working as a professional programmer for about 5 years. What I learned in Automata, Discrete Math, Algorithms, and the other more theoretical classes has been worth it's weight in gold. The things I learned in "Software Engineering" on the other hand, not so much.

>What I learned in Automata, Discrete Math, Algorithms, and the other more theoretical classes has been worth it's weight in gold. That was my intention when I signed up for University too. However, I've only had two maths modules, and they haven't been particularly challenging. One of the things I was looking forward to learn at University was hardcore cryptography, since I believe that's one of the few things for w…

You might want to look at switching to applied math or computational mathematics if the CS program is lacking.

Re: Learn to Code, It's Harder Than You Think

#132

Post by teh_klev »

bencollier49 wrote: post #102
jdiez17 wrote: post #43

This article reflects my experience at University very well. I'm a self taught programmer that ended up pursuing a CompSci degree. I'm in the last semester of my BSc, and in hindsight I should have studied something else, like Physics or Electrical Engineering. The standards are ridiculously low. Most of my coursemates (final year CS students) are literally unable to write software. They can write a single-file cpp f…

This matches my experience. I was trying to hire a junior programmer, and got someone in for interview who ostensibly had a first-class CS degree from a Russell Group university, yet could not explain to me what Functional Programming involved. He didn't even recognise the term. (Incidentally, the university refused to corroborate his degree, on the grounds that it would be a breach of the Data Protection Act, which…

> junior programmer

> could not explain to me what Functional Programming involved

See that first term, give him/her a break.

I've worked with experienced devs with many year's experience who couldn't explain the term functional programming, yet practice it every day. Just because you don't know the fancy programming term du jour, doesn't mean you aren't capable or competent.

Turns out I've been using the functional programming paradigm since 2001. It wasn't until six years later I discovered there was a name for it.

Re: Learn to Code, It's Harder Than You Think

#133

Post by makmanalp »

> There seems to be a ‘double hump’ in the outcome of any programming course between those who can code and those who can’t.

In my humble opinion, this is because the pedagogy sucks. Intro CS classes tend to teach in a very weird way, with very conflicting goals. Is the point to teach your way around a linux shell? Tooling? Basic programming? Algorithmic thinking? Good engineering practices? To teach automata theory? Complexity theory? Most courses answer "ALLLLLL OF IIIIIIITTT!"

Further down the article, you see that there is a large percentage of self-taught programmers. I suspect that this ratio goes through the roof if you ask "have you done a lot of CS / software learning on your own".

This is because self teaching lends itself better to learning and practicing over and over the diverse variety of skills required to be a successful programmer. Intro classes go very quick and fail to instill any of that. So those who are successful are a lot of times those people who are already long exposed to computers, algorithms, programming or the ideas accompanying those in some shape or form. Or those who find it immediately fascinating and put in much larger amounts of time than a course would normally require.

Those folks who simply haven't had a lot of time programming struggle, and eventually they drop out. And nothing changes to improve this because part of the class succeeds, and thus the conclusion made is that the part that dropped out must have been "bad".

There's a false dichotomy here. Yes, programming is difficult. Yes, being successful in the real world requires a lot of work. And yes, like any craft, the rabbit hole only goes deeper. But the conclusion here isn't that most people just "don't have the aptitude necessary". Most people, given the same time and guidance, can succeed.

The most important part is that getting somewhere immediately /useful/ can be quite quick. That's where programming shines - reasonably low investment costs for a moderate benefit for a lot of people, which eventually rolls into a high investment cost for a massive benefit.

Re: Learn to Code, It's Harder Than You Think

#134

Post by Alex3917 »

serge2k wrote: post #118
Alex3917 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'd love to see the source you base that claim on. Like the government's official data on adult literacy? http://nces.ed.gov/NAAL/PDF/2006470.PDF After 1994 they got rid of the 'advanced' literacy ability category, corresponding to roughly the level academic journal articles are written at, because not enough Americans qualified. So currently the top literacy level is 'proficient', which is roughly the minimum leve…

How is that paragraph evidence of illiteracy?

> at the minimum you need to be able to read English at a proficient level

Re: Learn to Code, It's Harder Than You Think

#135

Post by yarper »

todd-davies wrote: post #127

Does anybody else think that Software Engineers might benefit from a master/apprentice learning style? Experienced devs could take on an apprentice for a year, kind of like an internship, and the apprentice moves does 3-5 of these before moving into a dev role themselves.

Yes, Robert "uncle bob" Martin is a fan

https://8thlight.com/apprenticeship/

Re: Learn to Code, It's Harder Than You Think

#136

Post by austenallred »

serge2k wrote: post #128
austenallred wrote: post #100

>All the evidence shows that programming requires a high level of aptitude that only a small percentage of the population possess. >The current fad for short learn-to-code courses is selling people a lie and will do nothing to help the skills shortage for professional programmers. Outside the obvious lack of definition as to what a "programmer" actually is, this is a non sequitur (the conclusion doe not follow). Ther…

The lie they are selling is that anyone can learn to code in 10 weeks. While this maybe true if you are targeting the correct subset of the population (those who do have a natural aptitude), it's not true of a random sample of the entire population. Since these schools sample from the entire population, their chances of producing large numbers of skilled software developers are low, and therefore they will do little…

I don't think anyone pretends like you can "learn to code" in 10 weeks any more than I "learned to speak Russian" in my three-month intensive Russian course. Of course I didn't speak fluently by the time I left.

But I learned enough that when I lived in Ukraine I understood a bit of what people were saying, I could communicate somewhat, and a couple of years later I was reading Tolstoy.

People think about bootcamps all wrong. You don't leave like "holy shit I'm a master programmer." You leave knowing, "OK, it'll take a while longer, but I can contribute a bit now, and I'll pick up more as I go."

Re: Learn to Code, It's Harder Than You Think

#137

Post by Alex3917 »

vonmoltke wrote: post #116
Alex3917 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There's no way I could work as a professional software developer Actually given the way our economy is currently structured, it's easier to get a good job as a developer having never written a line of code than it is to get a good job as a marketer even with 5+ years of experience. It might take you a couple tries to pass the interviews, but that doesn't matter because getting interviews is relatively easy. (Albeit…

I think you are overstating how easy it is to get interviews for development positions. From what I have seen, someone without some demonstrated coding experience, professional or hobby, won't even get the time of day from companies looking to hire developers. They will never get to the take-home assignment phase.

I think you're correct for tech startups and large companies, but not for dev shops or family businesses.

Re: Learn to Code, It's Harder Than You Think

#138

Post by wes-exp »

teach wrote: post #29
mei0Iesh wrote: post #14

Where was the proof presented for this? That idea doesn't sit well with me at all. Maybe they meant to say that it's hard for most people to want to sit still and stare at text all day. It's hard to ignore urges to go out rather than stay inside and read tutorials on the web. I don't think programming itself is hard. Most people program. It's just that they do it without thinking about the steps they're programming,…

Your perspective is incorrect. I've made my living by teaching beginners to code. I have been doing it for the better part of two decades, and I specialize in teaching students that have little aptitude for it. I make my students code FizzBuzz. It is literally the 106th project I make them do. That is, they have completed 105 complete computer programs before getting to FizzBuzz. And many of them still struggle with…

The ill-conceived notion that parents giving children procedural instructions is somehow like programming brings me to a question for you as a teacher.

I've noticed that the industry really prides itself on algorithms and this is commonly reflected in interviews.

However, it seems to me that merely discussing algorithms, however clever they might be, is actually an intuitive human activity not unlike the example of the parent verbalizing procedural instructions to their child. Therefore, I would argue that algorithm design, though clearly an intellectual challenge in its own right, does not target the essential part that makes programming hard and inaccessible to so many people. (Disclaimer: a high-level algorithm discussion is usually followed by whiteboard coding, which I'm ignoring in this critique as a separate kind of activity).

Do you agree with this claim that algorithm design is not actually the thing that makes programming so difficult for laypeople? Can you give your take on what does make programming hard or what students struggle with the most?

Re: Learn to Code, It's Harder Than You Think

#139

Post by paulcole »

serge2k wrote: post #111
panglott wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Excatly. There's a huge difference between "everybody needs to learn to become a professional software developer" and "everyone needs a higher level of software literacy, including basic coding skills" Lots and lots of office jobs involve stuff like updating content on a Django app or shoestringing together Excel VBA and Access stuff. There's all kinds of tasks where scripts and low-level automation would be useful.…

I would argue that neither of those statements is true. I think this idea that coding is some sort of silver bullet is ridiculous.

It's not a silver bullet, but it is a bullet. Coding can't solve every problem, but it can help solve some of them, including some that would be very tedious to solve otherwise.

Re: Learn to Code, It's Harder Than You Think

#140

Post by Grue3 »

On the contrary, evidence suggests that people naturally learn to code when faced with operating a programmable device (even if they don't know what they're doing is coding). Everyone pretty much had to be able code to operate a computer in the 80s. And they did, even lowly secretaries with no fancy degrees. Now that people have to deal with closed-down computer systems that come prepackaged with everything the user is supposed to need, the coding is not necessary to be able to operate them. And then of course you get a generation of people who aren't motivated to learn to code, because they don't have to.

"Can't code" is the new "can't do math". What it really means is that the person doesn't want to code (or to do math), not that they cannot do it.

Post reply on HN