Hacker News Reader

Comment by neoberg | Hacker News Reader

Why would you encourage your kids to learn to code? Do you not like them?

But seriously; I'm not planning to teach my kid to code unless he is really interested in it by himself. I rather have him play outside.

View on HN

Why can't they play outside and learn to code? Does it have to be 100% of the time for any of those two options?

Yes they can. That's why I said "unless he is interested on his own". I believe many parents are so set on "preparing their children for the future" that they forget about "now" and force their children to become adults too early. Children can learn programming or other skills later but playing with toys or outside is almost exclusively enjoyed in childhood. I don't want my child to miss out on them.

I understand your point.

By saying "teach my kids to code", I don't imply "forcing my kids" into it. Just introducing, letting them experience and know it exists, what it's for, how it works.

If I don't expose them to coding, how could I ever know they're interested or not?

A tangent:

The two generations before mine worried too much about letting children "just play". Life was too tough on them when they were kids. And they went to the opposite extreme: made life too soft for me as a kid.

I grew up with a completely wrong vision of life and the world. I entered youth totally unprepared. It's anectodal and I bet there are people who had a too soft childhood with only play and managed it differently, but I'm going to find a better balance for my kids as they grow.

I want to smoothly and gently introduce pieces of adulthood to them, so that when they reach maturity, they're better prepared to be happier, more confident and independent.

I agree with most of what you said.

> If I don't expose them to coding, how could I ever know they're interested or not?

About this one; programming nowadays is not some obscure niche thing that it's impossible to come by unless introduced by someone else. I started my programming career (being paid to do) when I was a teenager. There was no-one using computers around me let alone knowing what programming is to introduce it to me. I believe nowadays everyone in a somewhat developed or developing country will have the opportunity to choose whether to learn coding or not.

I think this might be less true than you think. As opposed to the past, computing devices are ubiquitous yet extremely consumption oriented.

There is no obvious way an avid user of an iPhone or iPad might be exposed to anything resembling programming without seeking it out.

The same is more or less true with desktop os

Yep. And that's also true on Android devices (though getting into a programming environment is often easier, or historically was easier, on them than with iOS/iPadOS devices). It's getting easier on iPadOS with Swift Playground (which has been around for a few years now) and other apps, but you still have to know about it and download it.

In the 70s/80s home computers dropped you into a programming environment immediately or a programming-like environment (the shell or command prompt). In the 90s this was less true, but it still wasn't a huge distance from launching to accessing a programming environment (and on Linux and BSDs you still typically started in the shell). In the 00s and 10s, on macOS/Windows/Linux you can still get to a programming environment or shell easily enough (and macOS and Linux generally come with a basic suite of programming tools like compilers and interpreters), but the "distance" for the user has been increasing. If you want even some common tools you have to download them instead of having them immediately available, or in macOS you have to know that there is a terminal which provides better access to the supplied development tools.

Mobile devices have always been behind on this, but they've become an increasingly common first computer for many which skews the relationship that people have with computers away from seeing them as tools to manipulate (via programming and scripts) to appliances. They have more in common with embedded systems like the Tivo or video game consoles than with PCs, providing users with a preset script on how to use them and not the more open-ended model of PCs.

I was talking mostly about the desktop space. My experience is from more or less the current generation of desktop OSes (GUIs as default etc.).

>Children can learn programming or other skills later but playing with toys

Not debating you but I find it interesting how both your comments _differentiates_ "learn programming" vs "playing with toys".

When I learned coding at age 11, "programming a computer" _was_ "playing with a toy". Programming wasn't an "adult" job that grownups did. Instead, programming was like playing a music instrument or painting art with brushes.

That said, I agree that not all kids exposed to programming will think of it as play.

Same for me when I was first learning. I just wanted to get to whatever version of BASIC we had (I have no recollection now what specifically it was, but I asked my dad and he showed me how to use the DOS prompt) so I could make pictures like they did in my math textbook (end of chapters had lessons on BASIC and programming). Making pretty pictures was play, and then simple games (a hobby I continued with to pass the time in science classes in high school with my TI-85/86). And at some point in middle school I realized I could use these programs to solve problems and started doing that, too.

Just like there's recreational mathematics, a lot of programming can be "recreational", something for play not for "serious" work (even if it happens that the serious bits follow from the play).

I theory yes. In practice with kids, the iPad/laptop is much easier to get enjoyment out of and kids inevitably end up choosing it over going outside.

That's why you establish rules and remove the choice. They're kids, you get to do that. No tech until homework is done and the sun has set, barring bad weather days. More screen time available on the weekend. You can also set screen time limits in the OS now, which makes this easier than 33 years ago when I had my first NES (which was only limited because my mother wasn't working for a few years and kicked us out of the house, also we liked running around the neighborhood and town).

This is not just a false dichotomy. This is a false dichotomy the size of an aircraft carrier.

Sort of. My kids love to play outside. They didn't have tablets and didn't use the computer. A great regret I have now is that during the pandemic we eventually let them play with iPads and got them Minecraft on a donated xbox. We've had to limit their use considerably, but it's still an unfair competition. Learning, exploring, playing outside offers gratification in a different way. On Minecraft he turns it on and 20 seconds later they're in this wonderful magical world where he is some sort of superhero. Imagine if they also had twenty other games to choose from? I really regret letting the genie out of the box. Wish I had waited some years more. Now their time is quite limited, but they've felt how instantly gratifying it is, and are always asking for it, whereas before, they just asked to go swimming, or take a walk in the woods, or build legos, or a dozen other awesome activities.

edit: just to add, they still do lots of outside stuff, but it's not like before.

Every kid is different and I try to never second-guess others' parenting style.

Rules and limits are important and I agree the screen offers quicker gratification, so we as parents must set and enforce those rules.

That said, this changes the subject a bit, as we were talking about learning to code.

That's empathically not an instant gratification and we should not equate time spent in front of screen with time spent learning, expanding understanding of logic, cause and effect, structure, etc. And while kids are happy to spend hours gaming, I haven't seen many (in my social circle) that would be happy spending hours debugging some Python, Lua or Sketch code.

You're right, the example I gave is different from coding. I did change the subject a bit, sorry for that. By the way, my kids do some Micro:Bit programming whenever they want, and I chose not to force them into it, as in not having a structured 'learn block coding with dad' hour. If they want to do something with their Micro:Bit, they power up the computer and do it, for as long or little as they want. If they want my help, I'll help, and that's it.

There is a finite amount of time to do stuff (per day, say) so it's a time-wise zero-sum: any time spent programming reduces time spent doing something else.

Presumably the alternative to teaching them programming, is spending time with them some other way.

It's less of one than it first appears, because time isn't infinite and free time especially isn't. If you're doing one thing in that limited window of free play, then you're not doing some other thing.

I played outside, and learned to code. Still do both. But I do appreciate the caution. It seems like kids have less spare time today. Don't know if it's because schoolwork is more intense (it seems to be) or we push more activities on them (yeah, probably guilty). Or both.

As far as I'm aware, programming has been my favorite toy since age ~13. Of course the kid is not being forced, I interpret this as "hey kid, does this sound interesting?"

Exposure to things is key.

How is he going to know he's interested in an abstract concept like coding if you don't introduce him to it?

Me too.

Seriously, I’m keeping my kid away from screens and phones for as long as possible in this society. I estimate I can atleast get to 4-5 years of age before having to use a computer becomes somewhat inevitable.

Yes it's the same for us. He's 3 something now and his only interaction with screens is for calling the grandparents because they are at 2 days driving distance. We don't hide screens from him tho; I think that also contributes to him not being interested in screens too much.

We did that with my son. He was probably five or six when we went to visit his cousins and they were all laying on the floor playing with their portable game devices (whatever they called GameBoy's back then). He didn't have one, so he picked up a travel chessboard that was about the same size as their devices and laid down next to them and stared at the chessboard the way they were staring at their devices and pretending he was playing a video game on it.

Yeah, we bought him a nintendo whatever-they-were-called when we got home.

Because people see their children as extensions of themselves, instead of individuals. There's a good amount of research connecting ADHD-type personalities with insufficient rough-and-tumble play in earlier years.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com