Hacker News Reader

Comment by jfaucett | Hacker News Reader

I disagree with this. I feel like the general idea of "learning to code" is simply typing commands into a machine that then get executed exactly. The coding part teaches very little, just mainly how dumb machines are compared to self-aware human beings.

Kids should definately learn how to think algorithmically and understand mathematics/physics concepts (as opposed to repeating some pattern recognition which is to often the case) and if some type of coding facilitates engraining this knowledge I think that'd be great, but as of yet I haven't read a study that showed this to be the case.

As a programmer, when I have kids I'm not going to teach them how to code. I'd much rather they spent time playing outside, building things with their hands, acting in plays, playing music, reading books, writing papers, doing science experiments etc. Computers are nice tools to help you do these things but they are not ends in themselves.

this all IMHO of course :)

View on HN

For some reason, this reminds me of Richard Feynman's comments about science education in Brazil: http://v.cx/2010/04/feynman-brazil-education

"'I have discovered something else,' I continued. 'By flipping the pages at random, and putting my finger in and reading the sentences on that page, I can show you what’s the matter – how it’s not science, but memorizing, in every circumstance. Therefore I am brave enough to flip through the pages now, in front of this audience, to put my finger in, to read, and to show you.'"

To be fair, learning to code also teaches how to break down problems into their most simple pieces which is a very useful skill.

I am myself mixed about the benefits of learning to code. I am currently leaning towards it being equal to the other activities you list, but not greater than.

When I was growing up (80s), the computer was treated like a black box in education. You'd sit at the computer, recite the incantations, and the computer performed the magic. At school, they sat you in front of the computers and you just tinkered with the software for an hour while the teacher finished grading papers. At home, chances are good your parents didn't understand much about computers, so you were mostly on your own, and computers were so expensive that you didn't dare mess with the hardware.

These days, it's a whole new game. We can give our kids a more holistic education around coding because we have things like Arduino, Raspberry Pi, Lego Mindstorms, etc. We can teach code as one among many tools to get a job done or otherwise affect the world, rather than teaching coding as an abstract end in itself.

As an example, my daughter wants to build a garden with me in the near future. Part of that project might include some Arduino-based sensors. If she's interested, I can teach her all about it. But either way, there's a lot to learn.

All of this is to say I agree with you, that code is perhaps an equal, but not superior, among many other ways to help teach a kid how to think.

I would say if your kids have an interest in learning to program, help them, let them. If they don't, don't force it. There are a lot of things kids should understand, and anything else can be learned. The guys working on computers in the 60's and 70's understood them better than most people today working on a computer, writing software because they had to, and none of them grew up learning to code.

At 40, I'm well on my way to becoming a gray beard, just the same this shouldn't be required. Maybe somewhere around 10-12yo, an rPI or similar would make sense to tinker with in school... but that should only be to introduce kids to these things.

Kids are naturally creative and curious... let them know something is possible, and let them choose to explore. I wish there were more schools that offered elective coursework earlier on the junior high school... it would let kids explore more in a semi-structured way.

I don't think anyone is advocating LEARN TO CODE STAY INDOORS. I work as in a Head Start Lab in what we call the STEM Lab. We have 250 3-5 year old children spend an hour in the lab. They do go on a HORRIBLE Literacy Program (BUT THERE ARE NO Developmentally Correct Literacy Programs I can find). Children spend about 10 minutes on the computer and I believe the ability for the kids to learn to look, listen and respond correctly is why we see a HUGE statistical advantage to children that come to my lab as opposed to the 750 children who do not have access to the lab. So that is it in terms of computers 10 minutes over a 60 minute time.

We do teach coding principles by pattern recognition (big for literacy) and to problem solve. Heck we even do engineering with a problem, come up with a plan and then a creation. The kids always blow me away with what they come up with.

You can teach the great parts of coding outside with your kids (I do) and then see where their interest lie. My daughter who is 9 wants a Robot she can program and we will go the Arduino route. My two older kids never touched a computer growing up and no real desire except to play a game or watch Netflix (They didn't become a part of our family till they were 11 and 15). My 4 year old LOVE playing programming board games (the Turtle Game? and Robo Rally) Teaching kids how to think is a lost art and we have many things we can use to help us. Learning to CODE is code to me to help children learn to think and to learn it early which is good to me. CODE for CODE sake is dumb.

> I feel like the general idea of "learning to code" is simply typing commands into a machine that then get executed exactly.

But isn't that how every skill begins? With doing very simple things, by the book?

Like in your examples:

building things - cutting out preprinted paper models and gluing the pieces

playing music - playing scales over and over again

reading & writing - reading and writing simple sentences over and over

I don't know any skill where you just "jump" to creativity. It all takes time and effort, during which you actually learn the patterns.

I think coding is worth learning for a simple reason - computers are pervasive and universal tools, therefore to know how to talk to them is a part of universal literacy, just like reading, writing and arithmetic.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com