5 ms·

This is not a statement, but a question. And yes, I love SCRATCH and I admire its creators. I'm just saying that there can be another way, just as accessible, w

This is not a statement, but a question. And yes, I love SCRATCH and I admire its creators. I'm just saying that there can be another way, just as accessible, with minimalist tools, including the one I use, but not only. I am interested in your opinion.

mavhc 5y ago
I find the real advantage for 5-8 year olds is it's much easier to avoid typing/spelling mistakes with a drag and drop language. And if the output is also graphical, much easier to write simple games
eddieroger 5y ago
I agree with this, and was challenged by the presentation of "cutesy tools are dumb, write words." Some people are visual learners, some prefer reading/writing, others have other preferences. My buddy's kid is an 8 year old native programmer who has really taken to the blocky style of coding, and it's acting as a natural gateway to more traditional styles. On the contrary, my cousin learned some basic Python at 12 without any flashy tools, or even a good IDE. Lots of ways to learn in the world.
xyzzy123 5y ago
I think it depends on age, motivation and a few other factors. Scratch being embedded in an environment with graphics and sound provides motivation, reward and problems to solve that are relatable and interesting to many children e.g. "how do I get the monkey to chase the rabbit". The block "affordances" mean kids can get to the part where they make things without needing to learn any formal syntax. A lot of young children who are not ready to reason about syntax can nonetheless handle the ideas of events, conditionals etc. Many young children have difficulty with the motor control required to use a mouse (mostly mitigated on tablets / touch screens). However, many adults also underestimate is how much "implicit" knowledge is involved in using a text editor. I think anyone who tries to teach something "new" to kids will understand the experience of having it not go as planned. Scratch looks weird partly because it's the result of people doing actual "user testing" with kids.
schwartzworld 5y ago
Your programming language sounds great, and very accessible. But I don't feel that you actually back up your own point in the article. What makes your tool better for children in the age range that scratch is targeting? Have you actually tested it in any way with children in that age range? I know kids who learned scratch and it's definitely "real" programming. I think you're missing the major point of scratch. The main obstacle in learning to program for an 8-year-old is not going to be learning the concepts, which are no harder for them than anyone else I think, but the typing is a problem. How many times have any of us (especially early in our programming development) gotten hung up on misspelled variable names? There's no inherent advantage to typing every keyword vs dragging blocks. Additionally, the scratch ecosystem is designed around creating games and animations. As it turns out, young kids like games and animations, and it's a very rewarding experience to make something that you actually want to share with your friends and family. Even if your language is a better choice for a child that age, which I kind of doubt it is, it doesn't matter if the kids aren't interested in what they're making. Again, I think your language looks great. Just not sure it's good for the same target market as scratch.
- martyalain 5y ago
  I agree with you, it's a little "provocative", but you could have a look to this page: http://lambdaway.free.fr/lambdaspeech/?view=teaching http://lambdaway.free.fr/lambdaspeech/?view=teaching
- mwcampbell 5y ago
  > The main obstacle in learning to program for an 8-year-old is not going to be learning the concepts, which are no harder for them than anyone else I think, but the typing is a problem. I was already touch-typing fairly proficiently at age 8, in the 80s, and I'm visually impaired as well. I started learning to program in Applesoft BASIC shortly after I turned 8, and the typing was never a barrier. Edit: The teacher of the visually impaired who taught me to touch-type when I was 7 might have been unusually forward-thinking, but still, my experience shows what's possible. I hope the next generation of kids all learn to touch-type just as early.
  - 5y ago
II2II 5y ago
I don't really look at Scratch as a visual programming language. For the most part, it represents programs as text and using syntax similar to common programming languages. Yes, there are other visual cues and yes, it is drag and drop. Those are better thought of as learning aides and an alternative input method. Where Scratch shines is in the removal of frustrations. Rather than dealing with broken programs due to a misspelled variable, misplaced parenthesis, or syntax errors the learner has the opportunity to focus upon how the program works. That is far more valuable in the early stages.

mavhc 5y ago

I find the real advantage for 5-8 year olds is it's much easier to avoid typing/spelling mistakes with a drag and drop language. And if the output is also graphical, much easier to write simple games

eddieroger 5y ago

I agree with this, and was challenged by the presentation of "cutesy tools are dumb, write words." Some people are visual learners, some prefer reading/writing, others have other preferences. My buddy's kid is an 8 year old native programmer who has really taken to the blocky style of coding, and it's acting as a natural gateway to more traditional styles. On the contrary, my cousin learned some basic Python at 12 without any flashy tools, or even a good IDE. Lots of ways to learn in the world.

xyzzy123 5y ago

I think it depends on age, motivation and a few other factors. Scratch being embedded in an environment with graphics and sound provides motivation, reward and problems to solve that are relatable and interesting to many children e.g. "how do I get the monkey to chase the rabbit". The block "affordances" mean kids can get to the part where they make things without needing to learn any formal syntax. A lot of young children who are not ready to reason about syntax can nonetheless handle the ideas of events, conditionals etc. Many young children have difficulty with the motor control required to use a mouse (mostly mitigated on tablets / touch screens). However, many adults also underestimate is how much "implicit" knowledge is involved in using a text editor. I think anyone who tries to teach something "new" to kids will understand the experience of having it not go as planned. Scratch looks weird partly because it's the result of people doing actual "user testing" with kids.

schwartzworld 5y ago

Your programming language sounds great, and very accessible. But I don't feel that you actually back up your own point in the article. What makes your tool better for children in the age range that scratch is targeting? Have you actually tested it in any way with children in that age range? I know kids who learned scratch and it's definitely "real" programming. I think you're missing the major point of scratch. The main obstacle in learning to program for an 8-year-old is not going to be learning the concepts, which are no harder for them than anyone else I think, but the typing is a problem. How many times have any of us (especially early in our programming development) gotten hung up on misspelled variable names? There's no inherent advantage to typing every keyword vs dragging blocks. Additionally, the scratch ecosystem is designed around creating games and animations. As it turns out, young kids like games and animations, and it's a very rewarding experience to make something that you actually want to share with your friends and family. Even if your language is a better choice for a child that age, which I kind of doubt it is, it doesn't matter if the kids aren't interested in what they're making. Again, I think your language looks great. Just not sure it's good for the same target market as scratch.

martyalain 5y ago
I agree with you, it's a little "provocative", but you could have a look to this page: http://lambdaway.free.fr/lambdaspeech/?view=teaching http://lambdaway.free.fr/lambdaspeech/?view=teaching
mwcampbell 5y ago
> The main obstacle in learning to program for an 8-year-old is not going to be learning the concepts, which are no harder for them than anyone else I think, but the typing is a problem. I was already touch-typing fairly proficiently at age 8, in the 80s, and I'm visually impaired as well. I started learning to program in Applesoft BASIC shortly after I turned 8, and the typing was never a barrier. Edit: The teacher of the visually impaired who taught me to touch-type when I was 7 might have been unusually forward-thinking, but still, my experience shows what's possible. I hope the next generation of kids all learn to touch-type just as early.
- 5y ago

II2II 5y ago

I don't really look at Scratch as a visual programming language. For the most part, it represents programs as text and using syntax similar to common programming languages. Yes, there are other visual cues and yes, it is drag and drop. Those are better thought of as learning aides and an alternative input method. Where Scratch shines is in the removal of frustrations. Rather than dealing with broken programs due to a misspelled variable, misplaced parenthesis, or syntax errors the learner has the opportunity to focus upon how the program works. That is far more valuable in the early stages.