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

Code.org – Dedicated to growing computer programming education

code.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 187 posts

Re: Code.org – Dedicated to growing computer programming education

#91

Post by tomasien »

tcroz wrote: post #80
kamaal wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No Khan Academy resources are not going to help. Let me tell you why. If you try hard, you can teach some one 'how to code' but no matter how hard you try its not possible to teach some one 'what to code'. Or in other words, 'what problems to solve using coding' else everyone would be a Nikola Tesla. Its easy for us to solve problems like 'Parse this XML and do X', for kids its impossible to even understand this, or…

I think your misconstruing the purpose of these initiatives. The purpose is not to turn the kids into programmers at a young age. The purpose is to EXPOSE them to the world of programming. You're not going to make coders out of them in elementary or middle school. But you might make them more INTERESTED in pursuing further programming education in say high school. Mission accomplished.

Agreed. The fact that I could be a programmer clicked for me only because I made pretty complex TI-89 calculator programs and games in HS. I thought I was just dicking around, but later I was like "wait, this is programming? I've done this before!"

Re: Code.org – Dedicated to growing computer programming education

#92

Post by gizmo686 »

itistoday2 wrote: post #52
eru wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a neat idea. Just please be aware of the danger of extrinsic motivation crowding out intrinsic motivation. People help each other on the internet all the time without any reward apart from doing The Right Thing. Giving credits for getting more advanced help sounds like a good idea, though.

To be honest I really don't see much value add from these online teaching centers. All that's needed is the desire to learn to code, once someone has that, I think it's pretty easy to get the help and info you need (for free) already.

It isn't. I taught my self how to code, and have a 100 field array class for ints to prove it. (Literally, public int a1, a2, a3, ...)

Don't underestimate the utility of a teacher.

Re: Code.org – Dedicated to growing computer programming education

#93

Post by chaz »

ekianjo wrote: post #89
chaz wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm now glad no one ever introduced me to coding when I was a kid. I wouldn't throw out the "learn to code" baby with the "poor rote education" bathwater. Clearly that's a bad approach and is pervasive throughout schools around the world, and we need to stop it. There are many ways to learn how to code, and we're constantly developing better ways to educate millions of kids (I hope). But asking programmers today th…

> There are many ways to learn how to code, and we're constantly developing better ways to educate millions of kids Making it a compulsory part of education does not seem to be a "better" way to do it. Let's not push things that will be useless to most kids until they develop some interest for it, or for solving problems in general. Then you can bring programming as one tool to help solve issues, in a better/faster/c…

> Programming for the sake of programming has no meaning, just like we are being taught Math for the sake of Math. Education needs to be way more tangible and down-to-earth, at least for younger children.

I think we're agreeing. I don't think it's useful to teach computer science at early ages, but rather using programming as a practical application of critical thinking, logic, problem solving, and mathematics. Completely agree that it needs to be tangible, with instant, visible results that they can relate to. I think the MIT Scratch project is a great approach (code.org features this).

If @kamaal's niece is drowning in pointers, they're doing it wrong. But I don't think that programming should be universally excised from the curriculum as a result.

Re: Code.org – Dedicated to growing computer programming education

#94

Post by gizmo686 »

sybhn wrote: post #41

IMO make learning programing (fun) a path to learning math (not fun). Once you understand mathematic fundamentals, understanding finance - and other such disciplines - comes naturally. You soon realize that most of (consumer) finance out there are marketing flush revolving around a few formulas.

Why is learning math not fun? For me, learning math (fun) was a path to learning programming (not fun). Even as someone who 'enjoys' programming as a hobby, I hate the actual coding part. The math is the fun part. And that rush of power you feel where the computer obeys your every wim is a nice bonus (more of a reason to learn bash et el.).

Re: Code.org – Dedicated to growing computer programming education

#96

Post by ronyeh »

vignesh_vs_in wrote: post #81
kamaal wrote: post #73

Hear me out. I was full for this 'teach kids how to code' thingy. But I think we have got this all wrong. Heck we don't have the right kind of tools to teach kids how to code. In fact I have now realized that you can't and should not teach kids how to code. You rather must teach them how to solve problems. Math was supposed to deal with that, but unfortunately that turned out to be complicated symbol manipulation if…

I have a very similar experience with "Teach the kids to code". When i was in 5th grade our school bought a couple of computers and started teaching Logo( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logo_%28programming_language%29 ). It was simple little language, and all of us were excited cause we could make computer draw something for us. After that the curriculum for the higher standards moved more towards the MSOffice, Lotus12…

I have a similar background, with my earliest programming experience in Logo, drawing fun shapes. I then got into PC games, dealing with batch files, config.sys, and HIMEM to extract extra KBs of conventional memory.

I got back into programming when a friend and I built a flash card program to help us study vocabulary and memorize Chemistry equations. Programming is fun when it has a purpose!

Re: Code.org – Dedicated to growing computer programming education

#97

Post by logn »

kamaal wrote: post #73

Hear me out. I was full for this 'teach kids how to code' thingy. But I think we have got this all wrong. Heck we don't have the right kind of tools to teach kids how to code. In fact I have now realized that you can't and should not teach kids how to code. You rather must teach them how to solve problems. Math was supposed to deal with that, but unfortunately that turned out to be complicated symbol manipulation if…

Do you think a simplified assembly language would be better? I think a high-level language is generally good for teenagers or older. But maybe starting with assembly is better. It's actually a really simple language to learn (if you focus on a small subset) when you just want to do simple things. And it removes a lot of the magic that higher level languages have which could confuse things for kids.

Re: Code.org – Dedicated to growing computer programming education

#98

Post by dinkumthinkum »

scottrb wrote: post #71

If the US were to integrate coding into the school curriculum, our K-12 schools could rise to the global ranks that our university system currently occupies. But it can't just be an addon elective, it needs to be integrated across many subjects. So much of learning that's considered to be dull or boring can be made fun with programming. Write a program to simulate a ball flying through the air and aside from giving s…

Why are Javascript CRUD apps more interesting than learning how the world we actually live in actually works? I don't know, seems subjective to me.

Most of this "math is too boring for anyone to want to learn" stuff is a cultural issue anyway. It also might be a mass education issue. Either way, programming is not some special snowflake subject to solve such issues.

Re: Code.org – Dedicated to growing computer programming education

#99

Post by steveklabnik »

vignesh_vs_in wrote: post #81
kamaal wrote: post #73

Hear me out. I was full for this 'teach kids how to code' thingy. But I think we have got this all wrong. Heck we don't have the right kind of tools to teach kids how to code. In fact I have now realized that you can't and should not teach kids how to code. You rather must teach them how to solve problems. Math was supposed to deal with that, but unfortunately that turned out to be complicated symbol manipulation if…

I have a very similar experience with "Teach the kids to code". When i was in 5th grade our school bought a couple of computers and started teaching Logo( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logo_%28programming_language%29 ). It was simple little language, and all of us were excited cause we could make computer draw something for us. After that the curriculum for the higher standards moved more towards the MSOffice, Lotus12…

I love Logo; it's one of the things we added to Hackety. Before you start "Ruby," you do a lesson with Logo. (shhh, it's actually just a DSL.)

Re: Code.org – Dedicated to growing computer programming education

#100

Post by nickmeharry »

logn wrote: post #97
kamaal wrote: post #73

Hear me out. I was full for this 'teach kids how to code' thingy. But I think we have got this all wrong. Heck we don't have the right kind of tools to teach kids how to code. In fact I have now realized that you can't and should not teach kids how to code. You rather must teach them how to solve problems. Math was supposed to deal with that, but unfortunately that turned out to be complicated symbol manipulation if…

Do you think a simplified assembly language would be better? I think a high-level language is generally good for teenagers or older. But maybe starting with assembly is better. It's actually a really simple language to learn (if you focus on a small subset) when you just want to do simple things. And it removes a lot of the magic that higher level languages have which could confuse things for kids.

This is one of the reasons I'm interested in http://0x10c.com/ , when it ever comes out. The assembly language for the game's DCPU-16 is fairly simple. Currently it does take a bit too much to get output on the screen, but with better tooling it could be a viable first language.
Post reply on HN