Over the last three years I've personally taught hundreds of developers how to program, either directly on indirectly. I've written curriculum at all levels.

Over the last three years I've personally taught hundreds of developers how to program, either directly on indirectly. I've written curriculum at all levels. I co-founded Dev Bootcamp (http://devbootcamp.com http://devbootcamp.com) and am currently working on CodeUnion (http://codeunion.io http://codeunion.io). I also am a board member and instructor at Mission Bit (http://missionbit.com http://missionbit.com). I'm pointing this out because I have strong opinions about how to teach beginners backed up by a non-trivial amount of success. I disagree with Evan's conclusions, although I agree with the spirit of most of it. I don't know how much experience Evan has teaching or what opinions he has about how teaching/learning works, but where and how he misses the mark are what I'd expect from someone who is a very experienced engineer but has limited experience teaching a wide range of people how to program. Here's my summary of Evan's article. To be a good programmer it's necessary to have a mental model of how computers actually do their work. Languages like Python, Ruby, JavaScript, etc. make it difficult (if not impossible) for beginners to develop an accurate model. C, however, forces the programmer to build an accurate mental model of what their computer is actually doing. What's more, it isn't too difficult for ("smart") beginners to learn as their first language. Therefore, we ought to teach more beginners C. I think his claim is actually a little stronger than that — he's almost saying that teaching something other than C is a disservice to students — but I don't want to be unfair. I agree that students need a mental model of how computers actually do their work in order to be a good programmer. I also agree that among all the languages we have out there, C is the one that most closely approximate's the computer's internal model of how it does its work. On Quora, someone asked me what are the 5 language one should learn. At the top of the list was C. I said: "Learn C. C is the best language to learn if you want to get a visceral feeling for computation from a computer's perspective. " () I also recommended: - Ruby or Python - Scheme or Clojure - Haskell - Erlang or another "oddball" language like Forth, APL, or Prolog. Link: https://www.quora.com/Knowing-what-you-know-now-what-are-the-top-5-computer-languages-to-learn/answer/Jesse-Farmer https://www.quora.com/Knowing-what-you-know-now-what-are-the... More generally, you want students to have an accurate mental model of _computation_, not just how computers work. There are many perspectives and one doesn't really "see" the overall picture until one has adopted, compared, and related many different perspectives. While I'll agree that Python or Ruby might not give a student an accurate mental model of how a computer works on the inside, you won't be able to convince me that they don't give students _one_ accurate mental model of _computation_. For a beginner, we're going from a place of no model of computation to some model of computation. C's perspective on the matter is one perspective. Haskell's is another. Smalltalk's is yet a third. As a teacher, these are my goals: - Give a student _some_ accurate model of computation - Give them the tools to refine that model over time - Develop a sense of consistent forward momentum - Set them up to do all of the above without being in my presence IMO, whatever language we teach first should be chosen with these goals in mind. A beginner's first language is a beachhead. If we do our jobs correctly, students will synthesize other perspectives as they develop as programmers. I think Evan's rebuttal to this is encapsulated in this quote: > So Python programmers, as a rule, never get around to learning C. Well, maybe that's the problem! Maybe we should be teaching students in a way where the _need_ to learn C is obvious to the student, where the student sees a C-shaped hole in their programming knowledge (so to speak). At CodeUnion, we're absolutely not shy about diving into the Ruby interpreter's internals, for example. Want to know what a Ruby method does? Let's look at the source code! It won't bite. The problem isn't that students aren't eating their spinach. The problem is that students aren't being exposed to situations where they see the lack of spinach is the problem. The same is true of more abstract concepts like data structures, by the way. We can teach binary trees all day long, but it's not going to "click" for a student until they have a binary-tree-shaped hole in their life. Focus on getting them to that place and they'll be _begging_ you to teach them C, data structures, functional programming, or whatever else you think is the really important stuff.