On Jul 4, 2007, at 10:55 AM, Frank Wales wrote:
Charles Knutson wrote:
I believe there is a taxonomy of four types of people, relative to
professional software construction:
1) Those born to code, who need almost no coaching;
2) Those born capable but in need of training in order to be
successful;
3) Those not really born to it, but who can be trained
sufficiently to make a living;
4) Those whose brains are really not wired to build software at all.
As a matter of interest, do you have a sense of how the general
population
is distributed across these suggested types?
Rather than just categories or types, I'd actually propose a spectrum
of capabilities, with people who just 'get' computer technology at one
end, people who would sooner eat lint that use it to check their C
programs at the other, and the substantial mass of people bulging
somewhere along the middle. (Of the spectrum.)
I'd speculate, completely without anything beyond years of experience
and arrogant presumption, that the "just get computer technology" end
of the spectrum glows with about 5% of the population, the "couldn't
write 'hello, world!' despite years of practice" end is dimmed by
maybe
15% of the population, while the remaining 80% of the population
huddles
around various quantumly-distributed embers in between.
I think the end groups are inherent, while the huddles are plastic.
Of course I have no objective evidence for what the actual
distribution might be. If anyone has seen any empirical take on this
distribution, it would be very interesting. I could easily buy the
idea that the top is 5% and the bottom 15%. I also concur completely
with the idea of a spectrum. My taxonomy was more of a highly
granular way of describing such a spectrum. My apologies to anyone
who was expecting a fist fight ;)
Two last thoughts on inherent aptitude:
1) I've recently run into students who took the first semester
programming class at BYU, did well, got their 'A', and then washed
their hands of the field and went off to study business or something
else. Clearly they are capable of programming, at least at the entry
level, but the biggest dissuading factor to them was the inherent
motivation (or lack thereof). One of them told me that after spending
15 hours on a programming project, and finally getting it working and
passed off, they felt like they had been robbed of 15 hours of their
life that they would never get back! That was such a news flash to
me! In *my* experience, every program or project I ever finished has
carried with it some sense of euphoria and satisfaction that seemed
to make all the pain worthwhile. And much of my programming time has
been somewhat rhapsodic, like a runner's high. So while I don't
consider myself to be the most gifted programmer (or even necessarily
a member of the first group) I have always been quite satisfied and
happy with the process of constructing software.
2) I just started reading Stephen King's "On Writing." Interesting to
find this quote on page 4 (substitute "computer programmers" for
"writers"):
"This is not an autobiography. It is, rather, a kind of curriculum
vitae--my attempt to show how one writer was formed. Not how one
writer was *made*; I don't believe writers *can* be made, either by
circumstances or self-will (although I did believe those things
once). The equipment comes with the original package. Yet it is by no
means unusual equipment; I believe large numbers of people have at
least some talent as writers and storytellers, and that those
talents can be strengthened and sharpened. If I didn't believe that,
writing a book like this would be a waste of time."
Just a bit more grist for the mill.
Chuck
--------------------------------------------------------------
Charles D. Knutson, Ph.D.
Associate Professor, Computer Science Dept.
Brigham Young University
www.charlesknutson.net
----------------------------------------------------------------------
PPIG Discuss List (discuss@ppig.org)
Discuss admin: http://limitlessmail.net/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Announce admin: http://limitlessmail.net/mailman/listinfo/announce
PPIG Discuss archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/discuss%40ppig.org/
