Re: [ALACPP] Advice for a teacher, please

["Scott M. Anderson" <scottmanderson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Your points about the role instructional technique plays are well-taken, 
but you're preaching to the choir. I have been an educator for twice as 
long as I've been a programmer, and ALL my curricula have a starting 
point at what interests the student most and applies directly to their 
everyday life.

Having begun learning  C++ 8 years ago, and then Java 4 years ago when I 
went back to complete my BS, I found Java to be the superior 
instructional language for introductory programming. The syntax is 
nearly identical , you can introduce concepts of OOD, use of libraries, 
etc. in a more streamlined fashion than leaping straight into C++. 
Although I did not learn the languages in this order, I imagine that 
someone with a decent grounding in Java would have no difficulty 
expanding their scope into the greater complexities and resources in 
C++. In fact, I believe that is the ultimate destiny of Java, to be the 
introductory OO instructional language of choice until the programming 
environment changes drastically again.

I would want to give them as much C as they would need to make the most 
out of C++, but it does not strike me that it needs exhaustive study. 
Again, I learned C++ without any C, so my perspective may be a little 
skewed. In my mind, Those who wish to emphasize the fact that when you 
program "x" in C++, you are really doing "y" and "z" in C are 
forgetting, IMO, the fact that you're REALLY doing "n", "o", "p" and "q" 
in Assembly and Machine. I just don't feel the "C++ lives on top of C" 
aspect needs that much emphasis, but, not being grounded in C without 
the ++, I'm perfectly willing to concede that I may be completely full 
of it on this point.

If we planned on getting deep into rewriting the UNIX OS, I could see an 
exhaustive year in C (which, by the way, is about 3-4 times as much 
class time as my University wished us to have in this language), but 
since we don't get into OS programming at our school, I don't see the 
point. I'd give them enough C toward the end of the first year of C++ to 
drive home whatever points about C++ were really necessary, along with 
enough to get them using the OpenGL API and do some fun graphics, but 
that's it. Less than a semester, tops.

Thoughts?

Josh Dybnis wrote:

> It's impressive that the school has set up a multi-year curriculum. It
> sounds like the problem is that most students don't make it past the
> first year. Now I don't have enough information to know why that is, I
> would guess that the students are not having much fun. It could be
> because the way it's taught (the right teacher can make sex education
> into a boring class for high-school students), but I think your gut
> feeling is right. Doing a year of C is probably killing their
> enthusiasm. Kids are motivated by results, and C is so low-level that
> it takes too much work to get results they will recognize. Give them
> something they can have fun learning. Find out what they use their
> computers at home for. Then find the programming tool that makes it
> easiest to build the kind of software they use. If they all do file
> sharing, teach them Java and have them build their own file-sharing
> system. If they play games, teach them a graphics framework like SDL
> with Python and have them build a game. If all they use on their
> computers is MS Office, for doing their homework (not too likely,
> but...), then have them build a word processor. If your students are
> motivated to spend two years programming, they will have no problem at
> all picking up everything for the AP in their senior year.
>
> Now I'm going to take the position of defending the C class. There are
> some basic concepts students should get down which apply to both C and
> C++. Like how the stack works, the difference between stack and heap,
> pointers, and others. These are hard concepts to get, and there is
> nothing in C++ that makes them any easier, but there is plenty in C++
> that will muddy things. Doing C first and then C++ gives students a
> chance to see these fundamental concepts in a simpler context first.
>
> A big side benefit of doing C then C++ is that it gives them the
> opportunity to understand a high level system (C++) by mentally
> translating it into a lower level system (C). C++/C is not the only way
> to do this. It could be any high-level/low-level combination:
> C/assembly, Basic/C++, lisp/lisp (but I digress), etc. If they miss out
> on this, they will be missing out on the big picture in computers and a
> practical skill.
>
> -Josh Dybnis
>
>  



_______________________________________________
alacpp mailing list
alacpp@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/alacpp