I think the point is to maximise the chances that the student enjoys and continues programming, rather than worrying that they might be missing low-level concepts, etc., at least in the first instance. -----Original Message----- From: Jon Kiparsky <[email protected]> Sender: [email protected] Date: Sat, 24 Dec 2011 11:47:10 To: <[email protected]> Reply-To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [The Java Posse] Re: JavasScript as a first language
I actually don't see how Python is more exciting than Java - just my two cents, but it sounds to me like you're assuming that your students have no attention span. In my experience as a teacher, I've found that students tend to respond to such expectations by meeting them. I'm not saying that Python isn't a good first language, there may be good arguments for that, but I don't think that the REPL argument is one of them. It's easy enough in Java to get immediate results. You can put the student into an IDE, and for anything they're going to write, they have instant one-step compile, so that's not a problem. Or, more responsibly in my view, you can put them in an editor and switch between two sessions for the edit-compile process. This is a two-step compile process - and if that's a deal-killer, you need to redirect that student - but it avoids one layer of magic between them and what's really happening. It also allows them to make lots of mistakes, which is the only way they'll learn anything at all worth knowing. I don't really have a fierce position on which language you teach first, I think Java is reasonable, but I know people who started in all sorts of languages and they turned out okay. I started with perl, for Pete's sake, and I'm no worse for it. But I do think that this approach is a little worrying, because it seems to suggest that it's more important that the beginner be able to get something to happen than that they learn what makes it happen. Maybe I'm mis-interpreting the argument, but that's how it comes across to me. Best -jpk On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 10:06 AM, Reinier Zwitserloot <[email protected]>wrote: > This is just not didactically sensible. That's not how you get people > excited. Unexcited people don't learn well. > > And, in re: Ricky Clarkson's comment about Python, well, Cedric covered it. > > > On Thursday, December 22, 2011 9:48:57 AM UTC+1, fabrizio.giudici wrote: >> >> >> Frankly I think that JavaScript as first taught language is a horrible >> choice, just as it would be Java. C is still the best option IMHO, but in >> >> the end any traditional language that gets compiled into native code is >> ok. Abstraction is good, but only after you've completely understood >> what's under the hood. If a language has got a "WOW" factor, it's a very >> bad choice as the first taught language. >> >> >> -- >> Fabrizio Giudici - Java Architect, Project Manager >> Tidalwave s.a.s. - "We make Java work. Everywhere." >> [email protected] >> http://tidalwave.it - http://fabriziogiudici.it >> > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "The Java Posse" group. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/javaposse/-/phiQVx2GWEcJ. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
