3 ms·
The article argues that people should not learn to code but should understand "the logical underpinnings to coding, the way conditional clauses work and the cyc
by jiggy2011 13y ago
The article argues that people should not learn to code but should understand "the logical underpinnings to coding, the way conditional clauses work and the cyclical way in which systems are constructed."
That seems to imply that we should teach things like if/while/for constructs , but do so without teaching an actual programming language? This seems like an odd statement.
Not sure I agree with car engine analogy either, it's far easier to outsource all of the mechanical work for your car than it is to outsource all computer maintenance tasks. For example a car user is not expected to be able to install third party parts to their own car and most car owners have no need to do this. However we do expect users to be able to choose and install software on their own computers.
- thatthatis 13y agoYep. This article is among the worst examples of argument by straw man I've seen in a while. "Could the president mean everyone should understand the basics of how software works, I don't think so, I think rather that he thinks everyone should learn how to write every piece of code they use so they can get a CS job" Given two options, the author decides to use the less reasonable interpretation not because it is most likely but because it is easiest to write a flame-filled article about.
- blhack 13y agoDon't we already teach if/then/while/for statements in in high school math?
- thrush 13y agoNo we definitely don't. (perhaps only in rare cases) The Math Curriculum at my high school was as follows: * 9th Grade - Algebra * 10th Grade - Geometry and Proofs * 11th Grade - Pre-Calculus * 12th Grade - Calculus It would have made sense to teach integrals using for loops, and some proofs using if/else statements, but we did not use either of these methods.
- hfsktr 13y agoMine was algebra for 2 years and then geometry with more algebra (only 3 required, guess how many people elected for more math). I don't remember much but I never saw calculus in HS. I think the advance math classes went to pre-calculus.
- acchow 13y ago> I think the advance math classes went to pre-calculus. Presumably using some ordering where algebra < calculus. I don't know what your high school algebra was like, but mine was certainly much harder than derivatives and integrals :p
- hfsktr 13y agoMostly it was learning about variables, plotting, some polynomials later. In the end the majority of it was just memorization without a reason for using it. I don't really remember most of the calc stuff I had to learn but I can at least remember why it's useful but after 3 years I barely recall how to get a derivative and would have to look up integrals. Personally whenever someone can give me a percentage quickly (sometimes at all!) I am impressed. I tend to feel math education is lacking (in America/general). I especially like articles that surface on HN with math and even more when they have illustrations/examples [1]. It's amazing how many times I had read about it before it just clicked. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6683866 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6683866
- blhack 13y agoI guess my math teacher was just awesome, then. (Shout out to Mr. Tapps in Van Meter, IA). I remember doing "proofs" (although they were very simple) in high school.
- Spooky23 13y agoThe hard stuff is logic, and that's covered in geometry and pre-calc. Loops and if/then aren't very difficult, I don't remember anybody struggling with that when I was a TA. Logic, on the other hand was a learning curve for the students who dozed through 10th grade math.