Again, this is anecdotal and only my own very limited experience: But I think that top-down is *far* superior for people new to programming, but bottom-up may be appreciated by people who already know (an)other language(s) and simply want to know how familiar things work in this one.
> -----Original Message----- > From: Discuss [mailto:[email protected]] On > Behalf Of Pat Schloss > Sent: 11 November 2016 20:25 > To: Peter Teuben > Cc: Software Carpentry Discussion > Subject: Re: [Discuss] top down vs. bottom up teaching python? > > I’ve done both with teaching R. I don’t have any data, but I far prefer the > top-down approach. > > My version of top-down is to give them code that works to make a standard > plot. That lets them make something tangible in the first 5 minutes. I then > have them look at the code and ask how they would change colors, plotting > symbols, etc. Then I ask them how they would make a new plot using a > different column from the data file. I then wash, rinse, repeat building in > new > programming concepts to do different analyses and methods of visualizing > data. I far prefer this approach over building up from “Hello World” because > they get going immediately and because that’s how many of us learned to > program. At least for me, I learned by taking code that someone else > generated to do a task and hacked at it to suit my needs. Whenever I find a > new package, I take their vignette and hack at it to learn how the functions > work. > > It seems like most programming books are bottom-up while more domain- > specific materials are top-down. I agree that it would be very interesting to > hear other opinions and whether there are any data supporting one strategy > or another… > > Pat > > > > On Nov 11, 2016, at 3:07 PM, Peter Teuben <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > forgive me if this is something covered before but I'd like to contrast two > opposite ways of teaching a language > > > > What i mean is to teach something like python, you can go through the > rigorous language elements (which can be pretty boring) and build up your > skills to the level that you can program. This I would call a bottom up style. > > > > The other approach is you pick a problem in the field of your students (in > my case astronomy, so my example may not work for biology students), and > disect it and teach them the language elements as you go. I would call this > top down. > > > > Has this approach been tried and has it been found at least equally good? > Of course the huge drawback is that it only applies to a small group of > students. I'm curious to try this. > > > > > > - peter > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Discuss mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.software-carpentry.org/listinfo/discuss > > _______________________________________________ > Discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.software-carpentry.org/listinfo/discuss ________________________________ Founded in 1821, Heriot-Watt is a leader in ideas and solutions. With campuses and students across the entire globe we span the world, delivering innovation and educational excellence in business, engineering, design and the physical, social and life sciences. The contents of this e-mail (including any attachments) are confidential. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of its contents is strictly prohibited, and you should please notify the sender immediately and then delete it (including any attachments) from your system. _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.software-carpentry.org/listinfo/discuss
