> Most people aren't (or shouldn't be) coming up with truly unique algorithms/approaches Rote approaches to solving problems are great when the problem is very

> Most people aren't (or shouldn't be) coming up with truly unique algorithms/approaches Rote approaches to solving problems are great when the problem is very well defined and repeatable (need to fill an order for a coke and two fries). However, as soon as the mapping changes even slightly, Rote learning[1] and, in my opinion, Rote programming don't work so well. Even if every tool ever required to implement a software solution (algorithms/approaches/etc.) was available we still need to map a given problem to one or more solutions. This is why I wrote "Writing a program very rarely has the exact same context by which a rote learner can map a solution to." When I lectured, students could "get" what tools were available to them. If I asked them to describe a sorted list, they could in great detail. However, when given a generic problem, it was a lot harder for them to select from the tools available to them ("Oh, so to speed up this programing, I could use a sorted list"). That is the critical thinking part. [1] "Umm, I've already told the register that you are giving me 10 dollars so you will need to give me that instead of $10.50". - This happened to me and is a big signal that the person had done rote learning their whole life.