Beth writes:

I realize this doesn't help you at all being that my students are 15 years younger than yours, but I use the deitel book in my >elementary and middle school python classes and they LOVE it.

Recent posts on python-list indicate that even among people interested enough in Python to subscribe to that list, there is some considerable disagreement as to whether Python is in fact appropriate/optimal as a first programming language. I believe, at least for a certain potential audience, it in fact is. But would probably not put elementary and middle school students within that target. There is also a very long thread on the python-list as to "Why is Python popular, while Lisp and Scheme aren't?". Logo derived from L:isp, with a specific design goal of being used to introduce children to programming concpets. And to the extent that there remains interest in that, Logo seems to remain today by a wide margin the most widely used tool. I then wonder what folks who are interested in introducing programming to children via Python feel that Python brings to the table that Logo lacks. I do understand that it is reasonable to believe that out-of-the-box Python is more appropriate for children than out-of-the-box Lisp, for example. Or any other mainstream programming language, for that matter. But more appropriate than out-of-the box Logo? Would a language related to Python, but not quite Python - be more optimum? Art