FWIW, the concept of getting people programming ASAP in order to learn has been sort of poo-pooed by findings in the ACM: http://cacm.acm.org/blogs/blog-cacm/45725-how-we-teach-intro... I'm on the fence. I see the music-style logic to picking things up and working on the practical stuff right away, but, hey, studies are studies.
> no one challenges KSC on the basic premise, that putting introductory students in the position of discovering information for themselves is a bad idea!
The article doesn't say, "Don't get programmers studying code right away." It also doesn't say they shouldn't work on problems.
It says that the constructivist approach to teaching by giving students very little direction on complex problems right way isn't effective. Instead the direct instruction method of having them work on directed problems to build initial capabilities is more effective.
This has been the position of the direct instruction school of education for a while now. In fact, if you actually RTFA they mention that the constructivist model of is the failing. If you then read the linked articles you'll find the same thing.
Not a single thing in that linked article supports what you've stated.