3 ms·

1. MIT has maybe 5% of funding from tuition. Students are clamoring to go there. 2. True 3. All data seems to suggest showing kids complex problems leads to m

1. MIT has maybe 5% of funding from tuition. Students are clamoring to go there. 2. True 3. All data seems to suggest showing kids complex problems leads to more learning. "Too hard, too soon" isn't really a rational argument. At MIT it didn't really weed out students either; kids did okay. 4. Nope, nope, and nope. Of those languages, only Python has high productivity. C/C++ is obsolete for anything other than systems programming. The selling point of Java are cheap, interchangeable programmers with a standardized skill set. Small, elite shops do Lisp. But that's not the point. A freshman course isn't designed to be vocational career training, but to give fundamentals. MIT students learned other languages (including Java) in their degree paths as well. This was a freshman course.

bb88 8y ago
> 3. All data seems to suggest showing kids complex problems leads to more learning. "Too hard, too soon" isn't really a rational argument. At MIT it didn't really weed out students either; kids did okay. Sure it is. When you teach swimming, you don't throw beginning swimmers in the deep end of the pool and tell them, "A challenge is good for you." And in the example I gave of quantum mechanics, even MIT requires previous physics prerequisites. > 4. Nope, nope, and nope. Of those languages, only Python has high productivity. C/C++ is obsolete for anything other than systems programming. The selling point of Java are cheap, interchangeable programmers with a standardized skill set. May I refer you to the TIOBE index of programming language usage? [1] The answer is Java, C, C++, and Python in that order, and by a large margin. [1] https://www.tiobe.com/tiobe-index/ https://www.tiobe.com/tiobe-index/
- gibba999 8y ago
  3. We don't throw people in the deep end of the pool, but that has a lot more to do with not wanting people to drown than with what's best for learning. And regarding MIT, it's hardly an example of a school where faculty either know learning science or particularly care. 4. You may refer me, but popularity is quite different from productivity. Most C/C++ is maintaining legacy code. Most Java is either from legacy code, or from environments where productivity isn't a key metric. I don't say that cynically; productivity is a key metric in startups trying to disrupt the world. In older, slower-moving organizations, a lot of metrics are more important than productivity. If I'm maintaining a system for a bank which handles employee payroll, productivity is likely not even in the top 10 things I'd look for. On the other hand, if an IT employee quits, being able to replace them easily (without assuming a Google-grade interview process or salary) and have someone else be able to take over (without extensive training+documentation processes in place) is really important.

bb88 8y ago

> 3. All data seems to suggest showing kids complex problems leads to more learning. "Too hard, too soon" isn't really a rational argument. At MIT it didn't really weed out students either; kids did okay. Sure it is. When you teach swimming, you don't throw beginning swimmers in the deep end of the pool and tell them, "A challenge is good for you." And in the example I gave of quantum mechanics, even MIT requires previous physics prerequisites. > 4. Nope, nope, and nope. Of those languages, only Python has high productivity. C/C++ is obsolete for anything other than systems programming. The selling point of Java are cheap, interchangeable programmers with a standardized skill set. May I refer you to the TIOBE index of programming language usage? [1] The answer is Java, C, C++, and Python in that order, and by a large margin. [1] https://www.tiobe.com/tiobe-index/ https://www.tiobe.com/tiobe-index/

gibba999 8y ago
3. We don't throw people in the deep end of the pool, but that has a lot more to do with not wanting people to drown than with what's best for learning. And regarding MIT, it's hardly an example of a school where faculty either know learning science or particularly care. 4. You may refer me, but popularity is quite different from productivity. Most C/C++ is maintaining legacy code. Most Java is either from legacy code, or from environments where productivity isn't a key metric. I don't say that cynically; productivity is a key metric in startups trying to disrupt the world. In older, slower-moving organizations, a lot of metrics are more important than productivity. If I'm maintaining a system for a bank which handles employee payroll, productivity is likely not even in the top 10 things I'd look for. On the other hand, if an IT employee quits, being able to replace them easily (without assuming a Google-grade interview process or salary) and have someone else be able to take over (without extensive training+documentation processes in place) is really important.