Codecademy Becomes A Platform: Now Anyone Can Write Programming Tutorials
techcrunch.com
techcrunch.com
As I said I have not looked too much into what their lesson framework looks like, but if they offer a choice between js, ruby and python...that's already too narrow. If """we""" want to educate the general population about programming, it has to be way broader than that, and the framework that supports such education has to be more programmable
Teaching the general population how to code is a pipe dream. There is a hard limit on the number of people who can (and want to) become programmers, even at the hobbyist level.
These sites are great as accelerators for those who would eventually learn to code no matter how hard or inconvenient the process was. The sites are also a great way to introduce programming to people who otherwise wouldn't have known they'd enjoy it. But I think we're kidding ourselves if we believe that even 25% of the people signed up for Code Year actually start coding. Programming (not programming quizzes) is hard. People, in general, don't like to do hard things.
I wrote a lot more about this here: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3509620
You should figure out a way to do this right now, you have a product that makes me say "shut up and take my money" and I have no way of giving it to you. Instead I give money to your competitors (codeschool, treehouse, etc.) for similar services. If you have already developed the platform to create courses open it up so people can make content and get paid.
Treehouse - http://teamtreehouse.com/
Either you get money directly, or your left trying to monetize -accomplishment- data? Are we expecting the ad-market targeting newbie programmers to explode or something?
Honest question; I am looking for insight in this area.
Just an idea for a jumping-off point.
Just one thought.
I know Ruby very well (programming with it since 2006) and I have been professionally trained as a teacher. Yet "significant exposure" is not an incentive for me. I already have enough exposure to get the programming gigs that I want. My incentives would either be (1) money or (2) the joy of teaching. Since I have hardly any free time, my only incentive would be (1) money.
What sites like CodeAcademy, et al have to worry about is maintaining the quality of training from one batch of "not burned out yet" trainers to the next. Because if you aren't paying people, "significant exposure" only has a short life span.
Like it
It seems like one of the best ways to compensate creators (and support another young company) would be to integrate the flattr platform. members, would create CodeAcademy lessons and at the end/completion of each lesson, users would be prompted to rate the course, write a few sentences of feedback (e.g. "What was the most interesting part of the lesson? What did you learn? What do you still have difficulty understanding?) and then are asked to click the flattr button and flatter the course author if they feel it benefited them.
Benefits include payment to authors, another metric to evaluate course quality, and a payment scheme that doesn't feel like it is draining your user's wallet.
Though again, I defer to my disclaimer.
Nice move, but there's something about the article title that rubs me the wrong way.
Anyone know why it is restricted to Javascript, Ruby and Python?