I’m a Developer. I Won’t Teach My Kids to Code, and Neither Should You | Hacker News Reader

I’m a Developer. I Won’t Teach My Kids to Code, and Neither Should You

slate.com

29 pointsbetolink21 comments

This is mostly obnoxious. Coding is a great way to build logical thinking, mathematical maturity, and creativity.

Perhaps OP is confusing teaching syntax with teaching coding. At least on my end working with kids, it got creative almost immediately, and mathematical not long there-after.

It's fun.

Teaching them to code means teaching them to solve problems. It helps greatly their development and their thinking.

Before you code you think about what you need to solve. When you write the code, you think about the potential outcomes of the line/snippet you're writing.

I think that's a skill that is worth having.

I would add, that we should teach kids the modern version of the lemonade stand, which can be a the classic lemonade stand, but also add more bits of advertising, product differentiation, marketing, etc for something that isn't necessarily lemonade but already of interest to the child. Coding isn't the important thing as it is identifying characteristics of it and presenting them to others. It would be fun to make a website together with them for their friends to use. They would provide the ideas and the adult would do the coding.

What's better than teaching your kids to code? Teach them to lead with vision and ideas. Let the other 99% of kids become coders.

Slightly off topic, but I'm reading this on Brave for Android with an ad blocker. The site manages to show an ad. No big deal. The site also hijacks my back button. When I try to come back here, it says please don't go, read some more stuff.

Perhaps someone should teach that web developer how websites and browsers are supposed to work.

Good thing Brave allows me to block JavaScript, and a little ironic given that Brave was founded by Brendan Eich, creator of JavaScript. Genie, back in bottle.

I'll just add Slate to the list of sites I don't visit. Surfing on my PC has become obnoxious due the JS (ads?) spinning up my CPU fan to 100%.

I used Bromite (another fork of Chrome mobile) and had non of the issues you mentioned.

Interesting. I can't always repro. Maybe it depends on the ad.

Is Bromite available on Google Play?

Teaching children "coding" is as useful as teaching them any other trade, like carpentry. Something that can be a hobby, side business or become a real occupation. But it's absolutely non essential. Most people will never even gain an ounce of understanding for any aspect of software development and THAT IS OK.

I would argue that the majority of people that are considered successful do not know how to code. Also, responsible parents do not want to let their children become software developers just like they generally don't want them to become prostitutes and drug dealers.

I highly disagree with this. Programming, if taught correctly, teaches kids how to think, similarly as to how math does. In my opinion people in most professions would benefit tremendously from being able to reason correctly deductively and from knowing how to approach complex problems, which are skills that a good programming education will give you.

Does it really? I’ve worked with good programmers who will look thick as two short planks if you ask them to solve a maths problem, summarise a science article, rebut a philosophical argument, analyse a novel’s structure, figure out an unknown word’s meaning, etc etc. We all know STEM people who seem bafflingly stupid outside of their chosen specialties. Those who have well-rounded educations more often seem more smart and able to reason than people whose only tool is the rigid logic of programming/math. I don’t think STEM is an automatic pathway to above average smarts.

That is very much an over-generalization and dramatization. While there certainly are people who fit your description, not all people with math or CS backgrounds fit into that category. Also the existence of such people says nothing about the potential benefits of programming for people with different backgrounds. I didn't day that everybody's only tool should be the rigid logic of programming/math, but merely that learning those skills would probably complement most people's skill set nicely.

That is why I called coding / programming a trade. I openly admit that my interest in most CS topics beyond what is directly applicable to my work is about zero.

Almost everything teaches people how to think. Coding just gets a privileged position in the minds of techies. We don’t see people saying “teach kids to read professional history” or “teach kids dance” in the same way as we see people treating coding like the best way to expand minds.

I'm sceptical about this article. I think author contradicts himself at a time, and certain ideas aren't well presented (like, coding is not syntax, unless we disagree on definition of "coding"). While at the end author talk about good values, somehow the subject is viewed in harsh light.

Coding, like reading, shouldn't be forced blindly. But that doesn't mean parents, who're literate, shouldn't be also familiar with code.

More to the point, if every child learns to code, when they all grow up, coding will not be such a useful skill to have. Just like reading and writing. Of course you need to know how to read and write, but reading and writing is such a common skill nowadays that it's not something that you can realy on for job security.

That's not an argument against teaching kids to code- quite the contrary. You don't want your kid to be the odd one out, that doesn't know how to do what all the other kids know (to a greater or lesser extent). But we should maybe rethink the degree to which learning how to code as a child right now will ensure one can make their living coding in the future.

I can think of few skills that do more for your career than excellent writing.

Unfortunately, that's not an absolute. I've often been told to basically dumb down my writing in my papers because reviewers who are not native English speakers will not understand what I'm trying to say and will feel frustrated. And you don't want to frustrate reviewers...

For example, I once used the plural "lemmata" for "lemma". That is correct English, "lemma, lemmata", although it's much more common to use the Anglicised form "lemmas" (as, e.g. in formulae/formulas). I've also had colleagues "correct" my grammar when I've used expressions like "Absent X, Y occurs" or "X need not be Y", etc.

Sometimes, "excellent" writing is not the goal; writing that gets the point across, is. Much like code, indeed.

This seems like a clickbait title. Author makes the coding to be some sort of strawman to mean just learning the syntax and then attacks upon it just so he can have a controversial title, but not wrong at the same time.

This article is utter drivel and full of contradictions. This guy claims to be a developer and he seems to think its all about syntax. He thinks problem solving is alien to coding.

I pity the fool who hired this developer.

The article is junk. Nebulous blather ... Something which software unlike math, physics, Chem, EE, Chem Eng I think tolerates too much.

We could restate title as: "I'm _x_ and won't teach my kids to _x_ and niether should you"

where x is anything more complicated that cleaning a room:

- gardening

- writing a paper

- interpersonal skills

- etc

I'm a Developer. I will teach my kids to code, not just the syntax of a specific language. There's a big difference. "To code" is language agnostic. That's were the important things like logical thinking and problem solving skills are.

I agree that "coding" shouldn't be mandatory, but would the author still refuse to teach it if his kid expressed interest in the field?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com