On 05/12/2011 12:13 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: >[snip] > http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2006/07/separating-programming-sheep-from-non-programming-goats.html > > Shorter version: it seems that programming aptitude is a bimodal > distribution, with very little migration from the "can't program" hump > into the "can program" hump. There does seem to be a simple predictor for > which hump you fall into: those who intuitively develop a consistent > model of assignment (right or wrong, it doesn't matter, so long as it is > consistent) can learn to program. Those who don't, can't.
A later paper by the same authors... (http://www.eis.mdx.ac.uk/research/PhDArea/saeed/paper3.pdf) Abstract: [...] Despite a great deal of research into teaching methods and student responses, there have been to date no strong predictors of success in learning to program. Two years ago we appeared to have discovered an exciting and enigmatic new predictor of success in a first programming course. We now report that after six experiments, involving more than 500 students at six institutions in three countries, the predictive effect of our test has failed to live up to that early promise. We discuss the strength of the effects that have been observed and the reasons for some apparent failures of prediction. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
