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

We should teach all our kids to code

kernelmag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 81 posts

Re: We should teach all our kids to code

#61

Post by moocow01 »

dragonsky wrote: post #24

I'm sorry, but here in Australia and I assume from what I hear it is the same in the US, teachers are struggling to have kids leave primary school being able to write a complete sentence and add a row of numbers. They are already being expected to impart to the kids sex education, anti bulling education, physical education, sun safe education, how to not eat too much crap and get fat education and many other things t…

I'd agree that there is a huge disconnect between a bunch of us saying 'yes coding is a great skill - lets put it in the classroom' and the reality of the current state of education. There is a lot of sentiment about how coding is the new literacy... its not. Literacy is literacy. Math is math. You need to be quite good at both to then be able to program well.

Re: We should teach all our kids to code

#62

Post by gabaix »

rorrr wrote: post #18

I remember when we got our first computer, my dad won't let me play any games for more than a few minutes a day, but I could play the games I wrote myself as much as I wanted. That was a brilliant idea - it gave me the taste of the good games, which was a huge motivation. It did take a while to create an actual playable game (back then we didn't have easy to use graphics libraries like Processing), but then it all be…

We'll reuse that with my own kid. Brilliant idea.

Re: We should teach all our kids to code

#63

Post by LearnYouALisp »

gabaix wrote: post #62
rorrr wrote: post #18

I remember when we got our first computer, my dad won't let me play any games for more than a few minutes a day, but I could play the games I wrote myself as much as I wanted. That was a brilliant idea - it gave me the taste of the good games, which was a huge motivation. It did take a while to create an actual playable game (back then we didn't have easy to use graphics libraries like Processing), but then it all be…

We'll reuse that with my own kid. Brilliant idea.

I think it would be healthy to limit even the time playing one's own games.

Re: We should teach all our kids to code

#64

Post by bryanp »

rorrr wrote: post #18

I remember when we got our first computer, my dad won't let me play any games for more than a few minutes a day, but I could play the games I wrote myself as much as I wanted. That was a brilliant idea - it gave me the taste of the good games, which was a huge motivation. It did take a while to create an actual playable game (back then we didn't have easy to use graphics libraries like Processing), but then it all be…

My dad did the same thing. Thinking back, the first thing I remember doing on a computer is writing a calculator in BASIC. Before games or anything. To this day I still choose coding over games (ok, most of the time).

Re: We should teach all our kids to code

#65

Post by repsilat »

jiggy2011 wrote: post #37
jules wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Massively popular games like Angry Birds are much simpler than Call of Duty. The basic mechanics of such a game are easier to create with today's hardware and tools than a sprite based game was a long time ago. Sure, you won't be able to get anywhere near the professional game quality, but you can still have a lot of fun. I remember buying a C++ game development book that spent a couple of chapters before getting the…

Developing angry birds whilst considerably simpler than Call of Duty is not that simple. At a minimum you have to implement smoothly scrolling graphics and quite a lot of physics. Of course there are libraries available which help with these things but then you have a lot of documentation to read (if it even exists). I believe angry birds cost in the region of $100,000 to develop. Not really a learning exercise for a…

I'd be hard for a kid to make "Angry Birds" because of the block tumbling/collision physics. From experience, though, simple platformers, tank games and tron clones are within the reach of children with minimal instruction. A language/environment designed for that sort of thing helps a lot, though. We used QBasic, I'm not sure what you'd use these days.

Re: We should teach all our kids to code

#66

Post by mtrn »

aiscott wrote: post #45
RodgerTheGreat wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Last summer I taught introductory programming courses for middle-schoolers, and one of the first things we did was play Zork for about half an hour, as a class. Then I started showing them how to make their own text-based adventure game with rooms, a basic inventory and simple puzzles. All of my students were having a blast with Zork, and they seemed to find making text adventure games highly rewarding. I think you u…

I second that sentiment. I think text adventure games engage your brain more than, say, battlefield 1942. Similar to perhaps books vs movies/tv.

One of the first games I wrote as a teen was a (as simple as it gets) text based simulation/adventure dealing with horse races (I read The Difference Engine at that time). Even though it wasn't sophisticated at all, it felt interesting (and good) to play one's own game (and to think about the story and how to develop it further).

Re: We should teach all our kids to code

#67

Post by jules »

repsilat wrote: post #65
jiggy2011 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Developing angry birds whilst considerably simpler than Call of Duty is not that simple. At a minimum you have to implement smoothly scrolling graphics and quite a lot of physics. Of course there are libraries available which help with these things but then you have a lot of documentation to read (if it even exists). I believe angry birds cost in the region of $100,000 to develop. Not really a learning exercise for a…

I'd be hard for a kid to make "Angry Birds" because of the block tumbling/collision physics. From experience, though, simple platformers, tank games and tron clones are within the reach of children with minimal instruction. A language/environment designed for that sort of thing helps a lot, though. We used QBasic, I'm not sure what you'd use these days.

I believe that Angry Birds uses Box2d for physics. A kid could do the same. With such a library the task is much easier.

Re: We should teach all our kids to code

#68

Post by paintAcquaint »

billpatrianakos wrote: post #54

So the title is misleading. Really, he's saying we should teach our kids to think like programmers, not to actually teach them code which is a far better idea. In all honesty, people have an aversion to code like they have an aversion to anything math related besides simple arithmetic. I also disagree with his slight criticism of Codeacademy as being a place where people simply learn syntax. I was 10 years old when I…

I completely agree. It's a shame, I remember in middle school the excelerated writing class would be the only class that was learning about critical thinking. My problem was that the teachers were under-mining the capacity for other students in being able to handle that topic / skill.

Re: We should teach all our kids to code

#69

Post by Volpe »

moocow01 wrote: post #60
Volpe wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure I buy that arguement. You wouldn't accept that if we said: Well not everyone has a "natural ability" to read, so we'll only teach the people that are show some "talent". (Quotes because I don't actually believe those things exist, you can be taught everything, and be good at everything).

I don't think he's saying some people literally can not program one line of code. As with everything there are degrees of aptitude based upon ones interest, personality type and cognition. This is true with every skill in life - most people show degrees of aptitude in different areas. (As a note, Ive always struggled with being good at reading since I was a kid... Im really damn slow and have a hard time concentratin…

So are you agreeing with not teaching reading to people (such as yourself) who struggle with reading, because they don't show an interest/aptitude?

If that's the case, which subjects are the "essentials" that should be 'required' and which ones are 'elective'?

I'm not sure I think coding is up there with reading, or arithmetic... But it's probably more important than some currently required subjects.

Re: We should teach all our kids to code

#70

Post by moocow01 »

Volpe wrote: post #69
moocow01 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think he's saying some people literally can not program one line of code. As with everything there are degrees of aptitude based upon ones interest, personality type and cognition. This is true with every skill in life - most people show degrees of aptitude in different areas. (As a note, Ive always struggled with being good at reading since I was a kid... Im really damn slow and have a hard time concentratin…

So are you agreeing with not teaching reading to people (such as yourself) who struggle with reading, because they don't show an interest/aptitude? If that's the case, which subjects are the "essentials" that should be 'required' and which ones are 'elective'? I'm not sure I think coding is up there with reading, or arithmetic... But it's probably more important than some currently required subjects.

Essentials are foundational subjects that have the highest probability of preparing a student to become more productive and useful to society. So your question about required versus elective courses centers around 1) what society collectively decides is useful and 2) what a student at a certain level can practically grasp and grow from. I think we'd both agree reading is an essential by this definition but truthfully socially and communally controlled influences make these decisions (thing like the economy, elections, and enrollment) not you or me.

The problem with discussing this on a forum on HN is that we're all biased. We all think programming is incredibly important to society because its incredibly important in our lives personally. If you go onto any forum where everyone has a collective interest, they'll all say subject A should absolutely be taught in school because of X, Y and Z. Truth be told on a macro scale every skilled field is battling for the attention of capable students to eventually join their ranks.

I think what many on HN are missing is that if your going to introduce programming (especially as a core subject) into formal education, you'll need to sacrifice other subjects to make room with the way education budgets work. Of course everyone is going to say something like oh well you should cut down on art, music, social studies etc but its not a helpful perspective unless expressed in a truly diverse forum.

Post reply on HN