[Edu-sig] How do we tell truths that might hurt

[Anna Ravenscroft]

On Thursday 22 April 2004 15:17, you wrote:
> > I disagree. It's not a matter of "rigour", it's a matter of practicality
> > and
> > interest.
>
> I am willing to be a bit impractical and bit coercive.
>
> When did education become all about catering to interests?  Who runs the
> asylum?

When you're talking about college level - it's all about what folks are 
interested in. 

And, I thought we were talking about teaching *programming*.

> > The technical/scientific computations are the *LEAST* useful for my life.
> > Until I found out that it was reasonably easy in Python to do stuph *I*
> > needed done, I had no use for programming. That's after learning pascal
> > and
> > basic 20+ years ago. The last programming I did before coming to Python
> > was
> > on my Commodore 64, and then I gave it up because it had no use to me -
> > because programming was all about math - unless you're really advanced.
>
> Where do we disagree?
>
> "Programming is all about math - unless you're really advanced."  Isn't
> that what I just said?

Our basic disagreement is this: it's *NOT* really all about math. You can get 
practical, useful things done with programming that has nothing (or very 
little) to do with math, without having to be an advanced programmer. I know 
- I've done it for the past year and a half, and have been quite happy 
programming once I discovered that. I just wish someone had bothered telling 
me that back when I was learning programming 20+ years ago.

> Or, more accurately, quoted Dijkstra as saying. I'm 
> suggesting we fight that less hard. Go with it, exploit it.  You get people
> introduced to programming, I get people doing math, in more involving ways.
> We have different goals, but I don't see why we can't team-up, nonetheless.

I have no problem with using programming *also* to teach math. In fact, kids 
in gradeschool and secondary school need better grounding in math. We agree 
on that.

I just disagree with the emphasis on math in teaching *programming*, which is 
what you seemed to be pushing for.

> I have much, much less sympathy with the argument - "they don't care about
> math".  When did not caring about math become an option in our educational
> system? 

LOL - as a parent of two kids in the educational system, I ask myself that 
often. My kids learn math at home, because we care, not because they're 
learning it properly in school.

Too many kids graduating highschool these days couldn't calculate the area of 
a room, much less anything more complex. It's frightening - and 
heartbreaking.

> Math, more than programming, is the fundamental skill.  The 
> argument is as to which is the means and which is the ends.  There we
> disagree, apparently.

I agree that math is a fundamental skill. However, I think that teaching 
programming itself is *also* a useful thing, besides its use in teaching 
math. 

Personally, I think a little programming would do well to be included in 
several areas of the curriculum. Everything from math to literature to 
science to art. And I believe that this is possible. 

> > There are very few times in my life that I need to do scientific or
> > technical
> > computation. And the emphasis on that in programming made it hard to see
> > past
> > it to the things that I *did* want to do, or that it might be possible
> > for me
> > to do those things.
> >
> > I'm not disagreeing out of a dislike for math - geometry and calculus and
> > algebra are fun. (I'm even one of those crazy people who enjoys doing my
> > own
> > taxes!) But irrelevant, in most cases, to my life, outside of bookkeeping
> > (which is another area I use Python - have *you* ever tried to calculate
> > Italian taxes? Writing a program was easier than figuring out which
> > invoice
> > got which taxes each month...) FWIW - in a year and a half of Python,
> > that's
> > the single use I've had that I would consider at all mathematical...
>
> I know a bit about the subject of bookkeeping and taxes.
>
> I promise you the world will continue to get it books done, just fine, with
> or without Python.  And without programming becoming a common skill.

Yep. But for those of us promoting the learning of programming in itself, as a 
useful skill, remembering that there are simple, useful things one can do 
with it outside of math is important.
 
> At least one person - me - doesn't care much about programming, beyond its
> usefulness it getting people outside of schoolteachers and mathematicians
> to care about math.

I think that's a great goal. I just don't think it's the only reason  
programming should be taught.

Anna