Would you support schools teaching kids coding as one of their main subjects? (global warming, rating)

[dynamicjson]

Originally Posted by michiganmoon

I argued this to my school about 8 years ago - or at least getting a serious coding class.

as much as it would be good for the schools to do this, i dont think waiting for schools is the right option.

since there are already countless options, we should be paying more attention to why those options arent reaching people. its not the money-- many of the options are free. its not the difficulty level-- many of the options are ridiculously easy. its not even the lack of a need-- commercially or otherwise. i think its something psychological, or societal, or (most likely and easiest to fix) cultural, that needs to be fixed to get past this. im not saying that part is a trivial problem, it clearly isnt.

[pknopp]

Originally Posted by neko_mimi

No.

I don't believe you.

There already is one. It's called college. But most US students pick fluff majors.

Nor here.

[dynamicjson]

Originally Posted by pknopp

I don't believe you.

what exactly is your problem?

[Gungnir]

Originally Posted by dynamicjson

business looks completely different than it did in the 1990s. microsofts monopoly hold on development is a thing of the past, though they are still making efforts in my opinion. if youre a coder, you could spend your whole life making money without redmonds blessing. not every company that needs coders is hiring mostly people from other countries. it was a major change 20-something years ago though.

if anybody is interested in how to make coding easier for everybody to understand, or what would make it easier for them (or what they think makes it difficult for them as an individual) feel free to do so here or send me a pm.

in my opinion, to be able to code, you need to understand most or all of these 7 things:

1. variables 2. input 3. output 4. simple arithmetic (adding and subtracting, at least) 5. loops 6. conditionals 7. functions

some of these can be simulated using others, which means the real number is less than 7.

either way, you can write better problems using only these concepts than you would probably be required to produce for an intro to programming class.

schools can teach this. they were teaching logo and basic in the 1980s, both were developed for education in the 1960s. logos legacy continues-- most of the drag-and-drop coding you find in the easiest coding intros today are a continuation of its design, promoted by minecraft, lego and the mit media lab.

That list of 7 things is hopeless.

You need to understand one thing. Pointers (even Java and Python use pointers under the covers), everything else you listed is just math. If you understand pointers you understand von Neumann architecture, everything you listed and after that it's just syntax and math.

[dynamicjson]

Originally Posted by Gungnir

That list of 7 things is hopeless.

You need to understand one thing. Pointers (even Java and Python use pointers under the covers), everything else you listed is just math. If you understand pointers you understand von Neumann architecture, everything you listed and after that it's just syntax and math.

sure, run a marathon before you learn to crawl. coders are just weird enough that you could be serious, other than that its either a funny form of sarcasm with a serious point or just a funny joke altogether. the list is of 7 things that are easy to learn and write programs with-- quite a few people who can use pointers still dont understand them, leading to dangerous mistakes.

one things for certain-- your post is clever and humourous, im still on the fence about whether its either of those things for the same reasons you think it is. it probably depends on what your intentions were.

[pknopp]

Originally Posted by dynamicjson

what exactly is your problem?

I have no idea what your point is. You argued for coding as a main subject but have provided no evidence to support that. It's sad that there is a shortage. Could be. Probably would be if we didn't outsource.

That we do, I've seen no evidence to support the idea of teaching coding as a main subject.

Did you post to get a discussion or not?

[dynamicjson]

Originally Posted by pknopp

I have no idea what your point is.

you havent even made one.

You argued for coding as a main subject but have provided no evidence to support that.

you honestly dont seem like the sort of person that would be convinced by anything. reasons dont move you at all, facts dont move you at all. you seem to be here strictly to argue. either youre being dishonest or you are simply incapable of understanding the topic at this time. im giving you more credit if i suspect a lack of honesty.

It's sad that there is a shortage. Could be. Probably would be if we didn't outsource.

when people give you reasons, you demand facts. when people give you facts, you demand the facts arent facts. reality can only be twisted so far to turn your part of this into anything worth speaking to.

I've seen no evidence to support the idea of teaching coding as a main subject.

im thoroughly unconvinced you would admit it if you did.

Did you post to get a discussion or not?

a string of questions that ignores every previous answer several times, does not constitute a discussion. youre just barely interesting enough to not ignore completely, but i still think youre utterly trolling. why dont you p*** off?

[T-310]

Originally Posted by Chicano3000X

Part of my job is coding, and a few people there talk about teaching it to their kids. My boss who’s also a professor says that coding is a valuable skill to have these days.

Forgot where but I did see a vid about China teaching kids at an early age to code.

Extracurricular yes.

[Gungnir]

Originally Posted by dynamicjson

sure, run a marathon before you learn to crawl. coders are just weird enough that you could be serious, other than that its either a funny form of sarcasm with a serious point or just a funny joke altogether. the list is of 7 things that are easy to learn and write programs with-- quite a few people who can use pointers still dont understand them, leading to dangerous mistakes.

one things for certain-- your post is clever and humourous, im still on the fence about whether its either of those things for the same reasons you think it is. it probably depends on what your intentions were.

Bit of both.

Look variables, functions, I/O are all just algebra 101.

Y=mx+c

4 variables, one input, one output, one function.

Loops/Conditionals are pretty straight forward, hence why typical syntax includes if, and while. If you can afford it you can buy it. While I waited for Dave I drank a beer.

As far as I/O in a computing device, as a coder you probably don't need to do keyboard scanning, or raster/vector graphics display, ever, and that's speaking as a former OS developer, because all applications only interact with the operating system. If you grokk this then you know why pointers are required understanding.

[dynamicjson]

Originally Posted by Gungnir

Bit of both.

i figured.

Look variables, functions, I/O are all just algebra 101.

theyre more accessible.

Y=mx+c

that is exactly why more people dont know to code.

so many people are very mathphobic, and programming gives people a chance to learn math in an easier way, and then people like you go and turn it into the stuff of their nightmares-- because to you, that makes it simpler.

its sabotage. as disasterous as breaking into some elderly persons car and putting in 3 more steering wheels (most of which dont do anything) and several pedals-- whats the worst that could happen?

Loops/Conditionals are pretty straight forward, hence why typical syntax includes if, and while. If you can afford it you can buy it. While I waited for Dave I drank a beer.

exactly so.

As far as I/O in a computing device, as a coder you probably don't need to do keyboard scanning, or raster/vector graphics display, ever,

but people are more impressed by graphical programs than text-based ones, and you cant really explain how windows works and avoid the topic of pixels-- unless you just want to say "its all functions-- really." which i do, but not until i explain how pixels work.

look at the intro to programming at mit, look at codecademy, your joke has the dubious merit of being technically correct and useless in practical terms.

if the goal is to keep people out of your profession, job well done-- im not paranoid enough to think thats what youre looking for.

and that's speaking as a former OS developer, because all applications only interact with the operating system.

which is a program or a series of programs.

If you grokk this then you know why pointers are required understanding.

not to understand computing. or coding. but definitely to understand operating systems.

look, more people are going to learn python or javascript or something like that first.

theyre going to build up to function calls, which theyre really doing the entire time.

yes, the function calls are object methods. yes, python is typically implemented in c and javascript in c++, pointers galore, which you can certainly make use of.

python and javascript both mean most people will never have to understand pointers. but if they want to write operating systems, they probably will.

youre letting your specialty make coding into something more complicated than it is. we dont technically need higher level languages at all-- but even grace hopper realised that most people who code dont want scientific equations.

here she was, inventing the compiler and teaching university mathematics, and she insisted on words over symbols. "it will never work."

now its the basis for most modern languages. your mindset is the one she knew better than to foist commercially. the truth will always be somewhere between what she said and what the rest of them did. its clear what side of that youre on-- i will say most of it isnt wrong, just the part where your list is going to help more people than mine can.

if you want everyone to learn how to code, youre going to have to step away from the code at least long enough to figure out what people are actually capable of learning. grace hopper did, and i doubt you outrank her on any level, with all due respect.

once everyone knows how to code, they might have a chance at all understanding pointers. either way, most wont ever use that knowledge twice. not because pointers arent useful-- but because avoiding using them directly often is (outside of stuff like what you were doing-- which isnt typical coding. most coders will not work directly on operating systems.)

you wont just lose students with all that-- youll basically be recruiting more teachers to figure out how the hell to keep this out of schools for as long as possible. and theyre fighting it. they dont need to be more afraid.