Dependence on Programming Experts

[Judy Perry]

Dan,

Do you have a citation for this/these??

Certainly, the articles by/on Decker I've read.  I also read a bunch on
other (Delphi-like maybe?  I could dig up citations if anyone's
interested) environments...  black box vs. transparent box vs. zipper...
etc. ... I now cannot recall the name of the fellow who is the "biggie" in
novice programming psychology for ACM, but have read his stuff as well.

It seems to be a bit of an issue in CS-education:  apparently, there was a
semi-recent decision made to switch from a teaching & learning-friendly
language (Pascal) to a "real-world" get-me-a job langauge (C++) with
respect to CSAB accreditation-speak.

I'm not trying to put you on the spot; merely, I do try to stay current
with the research on this issue and apparently missed this/these.

I'll definitely look up the book you've referenced.

Thanks,

Judy

On Mon, 10 Jul 2006, Dan Shafer wrote:

> Judy....
>
> I thnk the research is a tad mixed on the subject. I remember a wonderful
> book back in the mid- to late 80's called "A Small Matter of Programming" by
> Bonnie Nardi, an extremely bright researcher in end-user programming. Excel
> macros -- which I'd argue are among the most obtuse "languages" on the
> programming planet -- rate very high with inventive user programmers despite
> their complete lack of English-like syntax or rationale.
>
> I thnk your point in general is well taken but the exceptoins are
> mind-blowing.
>
> On 7/9/06, Judy Perry <jperryl at ecs.fullerton.edu> wrote:
> >
> > And, yet, the literature seems clear that the best languages for learning
> > programming are those which are the simplest and employ natural-language
> > where possible.  Those employing magical black-boxes are the least
> > desirable/effective from a 'learning to program' standpoint.
> >
> > What is nice about Rev and has always been nice about Hypercard was what
> > some may well consider 'stooping to kindergarten'-level:  enabling people
> > to be minimally and comprehensibly successful with a minimal amount of
> > time invested; and that such does indeed seem to encourage a further time
> > investment.
> >
> > Judy
> >
> > On Wed, 5 Jul 2006, Stephen Barncard wrote:
> >
> > > Hey we program, and we use code. What's so technical about that?
> > >
> > > I don't think Rev has to stoop to kindergarten level either, nor
> > > strive to be the buddy of non-technicals. Programming with a good
> > > tool is by nature technical. At some point words have to be used to
> > > describe things, and these words already exist.
> > >
> > > I'd hate to have to use terms like "put the white box in here and the
> > > other one over there...."
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > use-revolution mailing list
> > use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
> > Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
> > subscription preferences:
> > http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
> >
>
>
>
> --
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Dan Shafer, Information Product Consultant and Author
> http://www.shafermedia.com
> Get my book, "Revolution: Software at the Speed of Thought"
> >From http://www.shafermediastore.com/tech_main.html
> _______________________________________________
> use-revolution mailing list
> use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
>