A simple way to "get more people to code" • Hacker News Board

Re: A simple way to "get more people to code"

#71

Post by doctorwho » Thu, Mar 20, 2014, 10:18 PM UTC

ChristofferSN wrote: post #44

doctorwho wrote: post #8

After 25+ years of coding and reading other people's code I would submit that the REAL problem is that the people who do code don't do it very well, some are downright stupid. There are a lot of people out there who will never be able to produce anything beyond "Hello World" and some will struggle to get that far. What if we focused early on identifying kids with good problem solving skill and other aptitudes that mi…

I think that one of the reasons we see so much bad code, is that customers have a very hard time evaluating the quality of the code, and therefore both problems could be solved by learning more people how to write code. I feel that I can write as bad code as I want to, and still get away with it (not that I do it), since nobody realizes it is bad until another programmer works on it which might be years later, or eve…

Lawyers have to pass a bar exam. Doctors have to get through medical school and supervised internships. Real engineers have to go to an accredited school. Truck drivers have to pass a test and prove they can drive a damned truck before they get the job.

People aren't forced to choose bad programmers, they don't know bad programmers from good ones or even barely competent ones.

What do you have to do to get hired as a coder?

Put a few buzzwords on your resume, spout them back in an interview to someone who has no idea what they mean and frantically google whatever you don't know on the job.

This is why everyone wants you to take a whiteboard test before they'll hire you now. It's all the due diligence they can afford. Sadly, a simple FizzBuzz test would disqualify most "coders".

http://blog.codinghorror.com/why-cant-programmers-program/

Re: A simple way to "get more people to code"

#72

Post by ronaldx » Fri, Mar 21, 2014, 12:43 AM UTC

doctorwho wrote: post #69

ronaldx wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't agree with your approach at all. You seem to start with an assumption that problem solving skill is innate and cannot be learned, which I strongly dispute. If you focus early on identifying kids with good skill, you might be pushing kids down the wrong path for them, or you might be excluding a lot of kids who will develop greater skill a little later, or exclude those with great creativity that could be appl…

I didn't say "push" I said "encourage to explore" and I didn't mention any kind of cut off age where educators would stop evaluating kids, this would have to be a continual process not the "GATTACA" style career predetermination you fear. Realistically, there is a segment of the population that will never be able to acquire skills that good coders have, or have acquired, regardless of how much you try to teach them.…

> I didn't say "push" I said "encourage to explore" and I didn't mention any kind of cut off age where educators would stop evaluating kids, this would have to be a continual process not the "GATTACA" style career predetermination you fear.

You would have to be more specific about what you are proposing, because it really sounds like testing for career predetermination.

Re: A simple way to "get more people to code"

#73

Post by ronaldx » Fri, Mar 21, 2014, 10:11 AM UTC

ForHackernews wrote: post #64

ronaldx wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't agree with your approach at all. You seem to start with an assumption that problem solving skill is innate and cannot be learned, which I strongly dispute. If you focus early on identifying kids with good skill, you might be pushing kids down the wrong path for them, or you might be excluding a lot of kids who will develop greater skill a little later, or exclude those with great creativity that could be appl…

Innate ability may be a large factor in programming success. See: http://blog.codinghorror.com/separating-programming-sheep-fr... If true, it would explain the apparent contrast between many programmers' attitude of "C'mon, this is easy! I can't believe they pay me to do this." and non-programmers view of coding as abstruse and frustrating.

The study that Jeff comments on is dubious.

The 'double hump' he discusses is nonsense. The study evidences it from test results where a group of people scored nearly-full marks and another group of people scored a lot lower, i.e. the inevitable result of any test where each question is testing the same skill.