From: John Zelle
But I honestly believe all that buys me is the ability to be a run-of-the-mill-programmer.
Perhaps, but no where near a run-of-the-mill student.
For the record, I think that is really only a matter of degree of motivation. Alice's "lessons", for example, might be valid within the domain of people who don't give a shit about learning to program. But then again, the chances of teaching someone who doesn't give a shit about learning to program, to program - without the slight-of-hand of changing the meaning of the word - is zero. And for the record, my own motivation for learning to program was always as a means to an ends. At some level I perceive the details of what it means to be able to program as largely artifical construct in any case - whether it be the Python, Java, Scheme construct. And therefore not compelling, in and of itself. Realizing, as well, that is what is inevitable within these constructs - i.e. what I guess computer science is *really* about - is not something I see as accessible to me, at least without more motivation then I have to dig into it, or the level of the kind of technical intelligence where things might pop out to me more effortlessly. I like to think that in other realms,.something other might be truer, but in the technical realm I see myself as a middle brow, at best. So I have not hesitated to consider my own learning curve as typical, and suggestions from that experience as within the range of what would, should be of interest to professional educators teaching at introductory levels. Art