4 ms·
This article disregards everything we know about how people learn for the sake of a cute analogy.
by dinedal 14y ago
This article disregards everything we know about how people learn for the sake of a cute analogy.
- tylermenezes 14y agoWhat do we know about how people learn which this is disregarding? Working in the CS education field for several years, this is very in line with my observations.
- drivebyacct2 14y agoI'm also curious. I think there's a lot that I wouldn't intuitively think about now with CS courses but other than advanced algorithms and time complexity analysis, I've been entirely self taught and anytime I learn a new language or concept I struggle with it by trial-and-error. I could read a whole book about C and not be able to regurgitate any of it, or struggle with a sample application in C and learn the mechanics as I go, so that I get an actual working knowledge of it rather than something intangible. For example, I'm in a class that is covering concurrency primitives. People understand them, kind of. They can trace a program, but they can't use them or explain where they'd use them. On the other hand I have a project making extensive use of them so I have an idea of how they're used and why they're useful and what they do... AND I also understand HOW they work. Now which is more pracitcal? Exclusively self-taught? Exclusively book-taught? A mixture? The problem has probably more to do with CS curriculums in my opinion.