[Edu-sig] Why is Logo popular, while Python isn't? (was "using Python for a CS 2 course" )

[Arthur]

Terry writes -

> Lastly, does it really matter if you teach kids to program when they're so
> young?
>
> I doubt it seriously harms them not to, any more than not learning the
piano
> will.  On the other hand, playing the piano, and programming, both are
likely
> to improve hand-eye-coordination, creative-thinking, and reasoning.  Both
are
> a lot of fun.  And both are things they will enjoy for a lifetime.
>
> Don't force them, but don't deny them, either. Choice of instrument is
much
> less important.

I think we are all starting from the point of agreement that in todays world
some exposure to what programming is all about, even if only in a broad way,
is probably a good thing to find its way into folk's experience.  Many folks
might in fact disagree with us.  But it wouldn't make sense for them to be
spending time on Python's edu-sig list.

I have always felt that it should be introduced in relationship to math -
which is the Kirbyish approach.

But the point being I don't think I see the piano playing analogy as
relevant.  I happen not be neutral as to whether  kids should have the
opportunity to learn a musical insturment. I think they should.  And I think
there is sufficient evidence to suggest it is better be done at a pretty
young age.  Mostly just empirical evidence.

I don't think the same happens to be true as to programming.  Just
speculation, admittedly.  I just believe that the prerequisite information,
experience and cognitive development necessary to get much out of an effort
to understand programming concepts generally kicks in at a later stage - and
that in any case, nothing of significance is lost by beginning the process
later.
Learning to play the piano at age eight, might in fact be a better
prerequisite for learning to program at 16, than learning to program at
eight - if that makes any sense.

But of course I started in my forties.  So might be prejudiced on the issue.

Art