3 ms·
We don't have mathematics for children. Or English for children. Sure, the stuff taught to children is simple, but it isn't simple coz it's being taught to kids
by DavidWanjiru 13y ago
We don't have mathematics for children. Or English for children. Sure, the stuff taught to children is simple, but it isn't simple coz it's being taught to kids, it's simple because the basic building blocks of any body of knowledge are typically simple. If you wanted to teach English to an adult Chinese man who only knows the Chinese alphabet,you'd have to start of with the same things you'd teach a child. When someone sets out to create a programming language "for children", my fear is that you might try to "dumb down" the art and/or science of programming. I could be wrong, off course. And I haven't looked at this particular language, so I wouldn't know if this is the case here. I'm just not very comfortable with the premise of a programming language aimed at children. What is it about it that makes it for kids? That which makes it for kids vis a vis other languages is what worries me in the context of what the kids will learn vis a vis what they should eventually learn, which is the "adult" stuff. Try and imagine a painting course for kids or adults. Same concepts, technique's, brushes, etc. In the same way you don't have canvases or brushes for kids, I don't think you should have a programming language for kids. But like I said, I could be wrong.
- rdouble 13y agoYou must have had a very atypical childhood and never interact with kids because there are tons of art supplies, picture books and "count the apples" type arithmetic books that are only for kids.
- snowwrestler 13y ago"Dumbed down" programming is still programming, just like dumbed down mathematics (2+2=4) is still mathematics, or dumbed down painting (finger painting) is still painting. In each case, children are simply being presented with a limited subset of the entire subject, to accomodate the real physical differences between children and adults (less complex mental models, less fine motor skills, etc). We can argue about which specific subset we should start with, but the fact that it's a subset is not inherently wrong.