What Should One Know to be Truly Computer Literate?

rbannon asks: "Computer literacy is becoming an increasingly used term in education, and more and more schools are being asked to set computer literacy goals for their students. Unfortunately for too many, it means being able to use Microsoft products, and that's all. However, I see it much differently, and I cannot help but think that computer literacy is all about using computers to be able to communicate more effectively. With that in mind does anyone have any recommendations for computer literacy goals, and how to measure them?"

Comments

It's all about context

[datafr0g]

You can't measure computer literacy without a context because "computer" is such a vague term these days and "computers" are used by many people for many different things.

FOr the average office worker it's knowing how to use MS Office. For the Hardware Engineer it means something completely different and for the software developer it's different again.

You can only be "truly computer literate" in the context of a particular field.

It's like asking for a "skilled driver" - skilled to what level? Skilled enough to navigate through suburban traffic or to compete in a Gran Prix?

Re:It's all about context

[Dadoo]

I'm not sure I agree that "computer literate" is that vague, but I do understand what you're saying about it meaning different things to different people.

I've been doing computers for more than 25 years, now. I can write software in a bunch of different languages and I can build computers and networks from scratch. After all that time, I'm only average with a word processor and I've never used a spreadsheet or a presentation tool - not even once. I wouldn't even know where to begin.

I'd like to get around to that stuff at some point, but I can't, right now: my company needs me to build a pair of 16-port fax servers with failover capability. :-)

Re:It's all about context

[smvp6459]

I think there's a difference between defining proficiency and literacy. It seems like literacy, in the category of reading, isn't hotly debated. It's a question of the most basic level of reading skills required to be considered "literate?" So what's the most basic level of computer skills required to be considered "computer literate?" If you go for the most basic skills necessary to interact with a computer and have it be meaningful: on/off, open and close programs, read and reply to email, save files, return to saved files, and go to a website and navigate through the site. Will these skills fulfill the needs of an office with advanced technology: probably not. Will bare minimum reading skills fulfill the needs of an office with advanced technology: probably not.

Another question might be: do we want our children to only be computer literate?

Re:It's all about context

[warewolfe]

Kinda have to disagree, computer literacy is the same as regular literacy. The more literate you are the easier it is to switch context and still gain useful knowledge.

The average office worker is not as computer literate as a software developer because generally, all they can do, is use their word processor, email and spreadsheets. While a software developer would be able use an IDE,compilers, debuggers and also be able to use a word processor to write a report and figure out their budgets on a spreadsheet.

Likewise a person who has worked in different enviroments (MS, Mac,*nix) using different tools, (text editors, spread sheets, media players,compilers) is more computer literate than a person who has only ever used their win-box to email. They may know every hot-key short cut and trick that Outlook can handle but they're not really computer literate if they can't send an email on a mac or linux box if they have to.

The more contexts/environments a person can work in, and the shorter time it takes to gain fluency in a new context, the more computer literate that person is.

Re:It's all about context

[WhyCause]

You can define computer literacy without context. In fact, I have taught literacy as such. My definition of literate would be:

1. Don't be afraid. If you don't know how to do something, poke around. You probably won't break anything.
2. Learn the rules. Save and Open are almost always under the File menu. If you want to change the font style, look under Format. Most common software sticks to an ad hoc Interface Guideline, and if you see the patterns, you can get almost anything done.
3. Know your history. In the beginning, there was the commandline. It worked differently than the windowing system you use now. Try typing 'help' or '?'. If you got there by accident, try typing 'exit' or 'quit'. Older windowing systems had the close button and/or menu in a different place. Look around the window and screen, then see Rule 1.
4. Figure out how to save. Data are no good if you can't look at them again. This should be the first progam specific thing you learn how to do.
5. Don't hesitate to ask for help. Find the help menu, read a manual, or ask someone for a pointer (not a held hand for the rest of your life).

Certainly, there are quirky programs and systems that require more investigation than the others (blender, I'm looking at you), but if you really and truly grok these points, you are computer-literate.

Your car analogy works against you here. When I climb into the van we have at work, I drive more slowly and cautiously because it doesn't work quite like I'm used to. The fact that I know how to look for the controls to start, steer, and stop means I am 'driving-literate' even if I have to hunt for the seat-adjustment lever every time I drive that monster. Just because I know nothing about lisp, and am thus unable to use emacs to it's full potential, does not mean I am computer illiterate; it means I am unfamiliar with this particular windshield-wiper control. I'll figure out how to use emacs eventually though, because I am literate enough to do so.

Re:It's all about context

[mrchaotica]

I don't know about that; I think there's a certain level of knowledge -- more than just knowing how to use MS Office -- that's required before you can call yourself "computer literate" in any field. To me, "computer literate" means that you not only know how to use the system, but you also know how to support yourself and fix problems. It doesn't necessarily mean being an expert, but it does require knowing the basic theory of how stuff is put together, as well as having the problem-solving skills to figure out the solution (through research) when you don't know it already.

Interesting anecdote: on my first day in my Statics class at Tech (a Civil Engineering class), the professor asked everyone if they were computer literate or not. Now, keep in mind that everyone including engineering students is required to own their own computer and take an introductory computing class (nowadays based on Matlab (for engineers), but a few years ago when I was a freshman it was Scheme).

I was the only person that raised his hand. When the professor asked why, I answered "because I know how to program the computer, and how it works internally." (It was apparently a good answer, because he found me a programming job for the summer, but I digress...) : )

Anyway, the point is, I could call myself "computer literate" while all the other engineering students couldn't because I was the only one who was also a CS major. In my opinion, it's having those kinds of skills -- or at least the ability to think in a CS sort of way -- that makes a person computer literate, even if they're an engineer (or manager, or whatever).

Re:It's all about context

[datafr0g]

The average office worker is not as computer literate as a software developer because generally, all they can do, is use their word processor, email and spreadsheets. While a software developer would be able use an IDE,compilers, debuggers and also be able to use a word processor to write a report and figure out their budgets on a spreadsheet.

Agreed, but I was coming from the point of view that the term "computer literate" is used so broadly that it requires a context to make any sense of what it actually refers to. There is no one single objective definition of computer literacy that everyone will agree on.

For example:
Computer literate to me means that one has knowledge of computer system architecture at the hardware level (where the actual "computer" computes) and that they can easily adapt their knowledge from one system to another.

But that's not the same as when a job vacancy is posted for a Receptionist to be "computer literate" yet because of the context of the job description, we all know that it really means that they're after a person who can use MS Office (or equivilant).

Re:It's all about context

[Daenks]

Thats funny... I use AutoCad for floorplan design and estimating, Visual Studio for programming, and MS Office for various other tasks all at work, so does that mean i'm computer literate? I think "Computer Literate" is more about understanding the underlying functionality of a computer, the concepts behind computing. For example, if Joe Blow knows how to figure out key combinations on windows software, he is then instantly more efficient at any program he uses on virtually any platform. If Jane Blow understands the basics of TCP/IP, she is then able to work with more complex software than the basic user, again, on virtually any platform.

Re:It's all about context

[abandonment]

I would agree completely.

I'm amazed at how many students in my game design teaching experience that are 'whiz kids' at basic windows stuff, installing games, screwing around, but have absolutely zero experience with the fundamental stuff that I would consider essential.

Things like 'ctrl-c' is copy and 'ctrl-v' is paste. Seriously simple stuff, but it works in (almost) every situation, and particularly with students that have used computers for their whole lives (and windows being the bulk of that experience), NOT learning basic things like this is bizarre to me.

I feel that the ability to write up a doc, create a powerpoint (style) presentation, actually do formatting on it - instead of relying on word's horrid default fonts & formatting. Being able to insert a table of contents, that type of thing. These are all things that I feel that at a college level I should NOT have to teach students, and yet every semester and even ever course, I find myself teaching the most ridiculously basic things to students that are supposedly 'computer literate'.

Not to mention using a spellchecker. Do they not teach spelling or grammar in school anymore?

Re:It's all about context

[Al Dimond]

One of my favorite quotations about CS (though I'm not exactly a CS person) is that CS is as much about computers as astronomy is about telescopes (said by Dijkstra). To the degree that computers are like telescopes, you would have to be a student of programming, of computational techniques, to really be computer literate (as to be "telescope literate" you'd probably be studying astronomy at some level). But computers these days have uses other than the kind of computation that's really in the core realm of CS. Sure, those uses only exist because of enormous software systems that had to be programmed, but understanding those systems technically is fairly orthogonal to using them.

Computer literacy for most people doesn't involve using a computer like a telescope. It involves interacting with systems that someone's already programmed, not designing systems. Most people want to use their computers like a refridgerator: knowing that they need to put their food in there to keep it from spoiling, and that they should wrap some of it in airtight bags or something, but not knowing how the heat pump works. There are plenty of people with messy fridges, however, that know how heat pumps work. There are plenty of people that know a lot about computer architecture or programming that keep very disorganized PCs.

Maybe there are some elements of knowledge that are shared; an expert on fridges might better understand operating conditions, maintenance expectations, performance and limitations of a refridgerator (don't try to use the fridge to cool your house in the summer, for example). But that won't stop the expert from having rotten vegetables fermenting for months down in the bottom drawer. The same is true of computers. My technical knowledge of computers occasionally helps me use them, but more often it's just experience with various familiar computer interfaces: knowing the readline keybindings, all the wacky vim commands, and how to get through menus and websites in order to use GUIs or post to /.

Re:It's all about context

[anagama]

Do they not teach spelling or grammar in school anymore?

Not anymore, everyone just lets the computer handle that end.

(I should be on Letterman)

Re:It's all about context

[stizzmindspring.com]

WhyCause is dead on. My Aunt is a great example, her ISP is AOL and she knows how to read email, surf the web and can use Word to type a letter and even print it. However she is hardly computer literate. She has no clue to the underlying fundamentals of modern computing. Sure she knows that double clicking that icon opens a window, but give her more than one open window and she's lost when she errantly clicks elsewhere. She can print only because her nephew hooked up the printer and showed her where to click when she wants to print. She can use email but hardly does because her inbox is constantly flooded with spam from all the things she naively signs up for. Her system is sluggish because it chokes on adware and she just thinks it's time to buy a new computer.

Modern fundamentals are what is key here. You have to completely 'get' the mouse: drag and drop, double click, right click, click and drag etc. You have to know directory structure and file paths. You have to understand that the internet in not just the web. You have to know that FTP and HTTP are 2 of many transfer protocols and each serve a different purpose. The list of basics goes on and on and on.

When you are computer literate, you can sit at a computer and do basic things no matter the platform or keyboard language.

Re:It's all about context

[Paco103]

A bit overkill for most people, don't you think? Should people not be considered capable of driving a car if they can't build one from the ground up? Ninety percent of the world wouldn't be able to drive, and a cab would cost so much we'd all still be riding horses. This is basically the same thing.

My mom works on a computer all day. She can figure out how to use the new programs when the company switches. She knows how to protect herself from viruses, not to open random suspicious attachments, and can fix most simple issues (such as fixing formatting issues in her word programs). She can find her way around well enough to use OpenOffice.org when she learned on MSOffice. She could not program a "Hello World" application in anything though. She could probably make it show up on a web page (she used to code her website by hand after I tought her the basics, but that was years ago).

I, as well as most IT people I have worked with, would consider her computer literate. She knows enough to know WHAT questions to ask when she calls for help, and how to do what she is told by the IT guys when they respond without having to say "third button from the right, down 2". I can tell her to look for something along the lines of ___________. Such as, if I tell her to look for an address book, she won't completely overlook it because it's called contact list in her program. At most she'd ask "might this be it?"

People do not need to know how to program, or all the inner workings to be literate. You can get a drivers license without being a mechanic. A drivers license states (theoretically anyway) that you are car/traffic rule literate enough to operate a car safely and effectively. Although this isn't on the test, chances are you know to look for a gas station when the guage points to E, and how to figure out where to put gas in any car you drive, even if the door is not in the same place it is on your car.

I have to go along with this post for my opinion. http://ask.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=186509&cid =15391558

Re:It's all about context

[jthill]

I just want to add one thing to that nice list:

• Have a basic understanding of how the internet actually works.

There are a lot of otherwise reasonably competent people who don't think they're "on the internet" until they've seen their ISP's bloated, ad-ridden web page.

Re:It's all about context

[AnalystX]

'Skilled enough to navigate through suburban traffic or to compete in a Gran Prix?'

So what you're saying is the average person should avoid race conditions?

Re:It's all about context

[l3prador]

In addition, I would say when you're poking around, try to learn how to remember what you did, so that you can A. undo it if something goes wrong (hopefully) and B. do it again.

The critical point for computer literacy is to be able to gain enough confidence and familiarity that you aren't dependent on someone else for help all the time (or at least that you don't have to ask for help for the same thing more than once).

Re:It's all about context

[mrchaotica]

But computers these days have uses other than the kind of computation that's really in the core realm of CS. Sure, those uses only exist because of enormous software systems that had to be programmed, but understanding those systems technically is fairly orthogonal to using them.

I disagree. For example, someone who understands the difference between interface and implementation is going to be much better off using Windows or Word or any other program because he'll understand that (for example) the toolbar button and the menu command and the keyboard shortcut are all merely ways to access the same function. In contrast, someone who doesn't understand this will be reduced to trying to learn his way around by rote. This is why you see some people who have been "using" computers for years but are completely lost when the slightest detail changes or some unexpected situation arises.

Or as another example, a person with a CS background will understand how to use styles in Word because he's been trained to recognize patterns, understand semantic information, and use loops. A person who doesn't "get" this stuff will instead instead always be applying superficial visual attributes to individual pieces of text, and then redoing the whole thing manually when he wants to change the "style" because he never defined one that the computer understands to begin with.

A final example: most operating systems have a scripting mechanism. Windows has VBScript, Mac OS has AppleScript (and now Automator), and *nix has shell scripts. Any computer user, no matter what their domain, can become more productive by learning to write scripts to automate tasks they do frequently. Heck, when you start talking about specialized domains like CAD and animation, you find that the individual apps have their own scripting mechanisms built in! (For example, AutoCAD has AutoLisp and Maya has MEL scripting.)

Re:It's all about context

[Tiro]

You could ask college students to raise their hands if they oppose fascism, and a minority would raise their hands. Students don't usually participate in these polls.

Re:It's all about context

[treeves]

Just as you don't have to be an author or even an English major to be considered literate in the usual sense, you don't have to be a programmer or CS major to be computer literate-not that you were saying one has to be. I don't know about nowadays but when I got my engineering degree, we had to take a programming course (most engineers, like myself, took FORTRAN)-I'm not sure why the lack of confidence among the engineering students you were with. Engineers usually aren't afraid to tinker around and figure things out, and I would expect most engineers to be computer literate. I'm not a programmer, but I can find my way around most any software, and more importantly, I know how to figure out or find the answers with unfamiliar software. I tend to agree with WhyCause's answer above. As to being "fluent" with all OSes and/or programming languages: many people speak/read/write only English - they are still classified as literate.

Re:It's all about context

[izzo nizzo]

I disagree with the idea that computer literacy is different for different types of users. Application aptitudes will vary somewhat, but I feel that the term demands the ability to create files, edit text, employ commands, adjust options, and explore features. I also think that a literate can write text that employs commands, and create web pages. Programming is speaking the computer's language, and webmastering is speech in computer language that is heard in human language. Someone should learn both of these before they are considered literate.

Re:It's all about context

[solarappleman]

We, who know only how to use computer for variety of tasks, are not computer literate. And most of us have neither willingness nor time to actually educate in that field.

If literacy only meant a minimal amount of knowledge required to successfully operate some device, then we could speak of mobile phone literacy, TV literacy and so on. That is not literacy.

Nowadays, computer literacy is truly rare compared to the spread of computers in general. And modern software is engineered specifically to address the illiterate auditory.

Here I must notice that computer courses are mainly pointed to retards. To normal people, even to complete illiterates, electronic devices use patterns are not something to be taught about.

Dear friends! Forget button shortcuts and menu navigations when you speak of computer literacy. There is no computer literacy other than the computer science. Regardles of whether we find learning THAT amount of knoledge actually useful or not.

Re:It's all about context

[mianne]

Many of the comments so far have been valid yet contradictory, not to mention many that are more or less out of date.

1) Being willing to experiment and try things out vs. not clicking on that pop-up or attachment.. This is made MUCH worse when all it takes for a computer to become riddled with spyware these days is simply an out of the box install of Windows and an internet connection.. Very likely have the root directory will be filled with trojans and the desktop with popup phishing schemes long before the "average" user can click on Windows Update, let alone find a site like grc.com.

2) More on that point. Sure, we can all laugh about how ridiculous the "Nigerian Finance Minister" type scams are, but many highly intelligent people have fallen for these ploys. Social Engineering would not remain a primary tool in the gray/black hat hacker's toolkit were it not so darn effective -- even when the target may very well have a Mensa level IQ. I have to admit, I've been in the the 'right' frame of mind at times to nearly buy into the MMF scams, thankfully the still small voice in my head was able to scream "NO!" enough to prevent me from falling all the way in, but let's just say I was on the edge of the pit and had banana peels under my feet.

3) Teaching a user how to program to become "computer literate" seems like overkill nowadays. Back in the age of the Apple II/C-64/Atari 400/etc. when you couldn't even load a store-bought game without rudimentary programming skills and definately not without RTFM at least once, it was essential. Now that programming one's computer for most users would entail purchasing Visual Basic or similar which is probably not available at Walmart and certainly not in the price range for the casual computer user, this just isn't realistic.

4) Moreover, nowadays monitors go into stand-by when the computer is turned off, the computer will frequently go into standby by default after a period of time, most connectors for computer peripherals are color coded to take the guesswork out of setting up a system.

Granted, I still hear people refer to their beige box as the "cpu" and talk about how much memory it has when they're clearly talking about hd capacity, same things I encountered from people 15 years ago, but computers have become a LOT more intuitive over the years, and I'm ever so grateful I will never again have to repeatedly instruct the same person how to format a 3.5 disk in MS-DOS 4.01!

But with the increased intuitiveness comes increased danger since RTFM is no longer an absolute requirement to find your way online. When wireless routers ship with WEP disabled and worse yet recommend that it be left disabled in the "Quick Start Guide" it isn't just the scammers who are out to prey on unsuspecting novices, it is the major hardware/software producers who want to keep their tech support overhead down to a bare minimum that are a big part of the problem as well.

Re:It's all about context

[Sillygates]

I just graduated from high school last year, and I completely agree with the clip, and am highly annoyed that my high school, among others, introduce students to Microsoft only products, and do not even touch computer science.

Unlike what some other people in this thread have said, I believe high schools should go further in depth: high schools should require students to take courses in abstract programming concepts, to build upon simple word processing concepts (which can just as easily be taught in OpenOffice) learned at an even younger age.

Programs like OpenOffice are as simple as Microsoft word to use, and support many platforms, which could open schools up to using *nix, which in turn could help students get acquainted with a more technical computing environment. Why? because computing is becoming part of everyone's lives, and for a lot of people, a career.

Many jobs exist which require people to sit in front of a computers almost every day of their lives, and many of those people do not have a clue as to what is going on behind the scenes of their user environment. If they encounter an obstical all they know how to do is complain, or ask someone else for help. For those people, (say, a lawyer writing a legal document) why should they not have to know anything more than the interface of a closed source word processor? In the future computer devices are going to be all over the place, in watches, cereal boxes, cellphones, etc. and people are going to have to interact with these devices quickly and efficiently.

Several hundred years ago most people did not know how to read, it was not a required skill. Now people are expected to have the ability to read, write and comprehend text, why should computing be different? A move to open source in our schools, along with actually teaching programming basic programming concepts would give all students the ability to look at, and improve upon the software that is already a compilation of 1000s of peoples' works.

Re:It's all about context

[Fred_A]

Don't be afraid. If you don't know how to do something, poke around. You probably won't break anything.

This is the one thing most people have the most trouble learning. Getting users to drop their cherished "recipes" and take their first steps alone can be a daunting task.

Re:It's all about context

[john holycrow]

Start with bitwise operations, like AND, OR and SHIFT. Then advance to ITERATION, BRANCHING and LOOPIING. Lexical and semantic analysis come next, then you're ready to write your first language!

Re:It's all about context

[Fred_A]

If they actually were to teach students how to use wordprocessors in school, they *really* ought to teach them basic typography and layout as well.

Even if the only outcome would be to get rid of those Comic-Sans memos and letters it would be time well spent.

Re:It's all about context

[kegon]

Computer literacy is about two logical outcomes:

Computer literate
Not computer literate

Computer literate is someone who knows how computers work and something about the potential of what you can do with one. You don't need to know the details of how to do it, just some idea of the technologies that exist that would probably let you.

Not computer literate is someone who just types, points and clicks. No idea how things work internally, only that drag file from here, drop there, it works for me.

I have seen a number of resumes that boast "skills in MS Office" or similar. When I read this I think "Wow, this person learnt how to use something designed to be easy to use. Big deal.

Re:It's all about context

[Eskarel]

Don't be afraid. If you don't know how to do something, poke around. You probably won't break anything.

Don't you dare tell people this, they not only can break things, they quite frequently do, over and over and over again. Then they call me and ask me to fix things which wouldn't have been broken in the first place if they didn't treat their PC's like a toy.

Anyone who has worked in IT support knows damned well that an idiot who can't turn the thing on is better than a fiddler. Idiots don't try to "fix" things which aren't broken, idiots don't make my life miserable. Let em fiddle with their own PC's and leave mine alone, it's bad enough that everything on them is 3 years out of date because the managers are stuck in the stone age, I don't need them installing iTunes on them as well.

Re:It's all about context

[gEvil (beta)]

Just because I know nothing about lisp, and am thus unable to use emacs to it's full potential, does not mean I am computer illiterate; it means I am unfamiliar with this particular windshield-wiper control.

Emacs has a windshield-wiper?!? I mean, I'm not completely surprised, but it just seems a little odd...

Re:It's all about context

[ElleyKitten]

Fiddling is how people move from computer idiots to geeks. You can't take a class in everything possible to learn about a computer, and you'll be much more comfortable with computers if you can figure things out on your own.

Also, in my experience in IT support, the fiddlers are the ones who don't call me, because they think they can figure it out on their own, which is perfectly fine by me. It's much better than the woman at work who decided that windows update was a virus because it was downloading and installing to her computer all by itself, so she pulled out her laptop battery to stop it. Yeah, I'll take a fiddler any day over her.

Re:It's all about context

[BecksMan_OhYeah]

"In addition, I would say when you're poking around, try to learn how to remember what you did, so that you can A. undo it if something goes wrong (hopefully) and B. do it again."

This is just common sense, maybe we should call it life literacy. Actually, this is what schools need to be teaching more of, because nobody is learning it at home. How many times have you had this conversation with your mom/wife/girlfriend?
(I love car analogies too)

Her: My car is making a funny noise, do you have any idea what it might be.
You: what kind of noise?
Her: a loud noise
You: what does it sound like?
Her: It sounds like juggling
(wtf that means?)
You: constantly?
Her: no
You: when does it do it?
Her: every time I drive it.
You: no, I mean what, exactly, are you doing when it happens?
Her: Well, it happens when I'm doing lots of things. The last time it happened, I was going to the post office. The time before that I was going to the grocery...
You: No, I mean, does it happen when you start it, when you speed up, slow down, make turns, are idling at a traffic light, what?
Her: No, its not when I start it. Its after that
You: Do you hear it when you pull out of the driveway?
Her: No, I don't think so. It just does it sometimes.
You: but when, exactly?
Her: I don't know. I can't remember. All I know is its made a juggling sound several times when I've been driving it. Never-mind, I'll take to the dealership, they'll be able to figure it out, they figured out that wombolly sound.
You: you mean the flat tire you had last month?
Her: No, it was a bad root valve (valve stem) or something.

Re:It's all about context

[Willuknight]

This is sort of what my mother is like. I find the main problem is that she WONT read menus, she doesnt read error messages, and she doesnt explore what things can do. If anything deviates from what shes used to, or she forgets something, she gets stuck and has to call me.

Re:It's all about context

[dhasenan]

Argh, you beat me.

Still, after Emacs broke into the psychotherapy market, they extended to other portions of the labor industry, including gas station attendants (added in 20.2-3).

Re:It's all about context

[jimktrains]

I think it means that people should be familar enough with a computer that when presented with a problem, that they can at least find a way around it.

Some people I work with are by no means computer nerds or well versed in computers, but they know enough, beyond just office and what they need for work, that they can figure out solutions to some problems and are able to give me a fairly good idea of what a problem is when they need help. This is what I want, not excessive knowlege or fancy terms, jsut the ablility to think.

Re:It's all about context

[dhasenan]

Theoretical computer science doesn't really involve computers except for using their limitations as a source of problems to solve. However, there is another section to computer science: systems.

You really need to know a lot about the computers you're using in order to do a good job with systems. Systems is about software (and, I suppose, hardware) design and implementation. Creating a kernel module to implement a new filesystem would be a common task in systems research.

So, when saying that computer science has little to do with computers, you should specify that you're talking about theory or algorithms, not systems.

Your little pedantic thought for the day.

Re:It's all about context

[dhasenan]

On the other hand, how many kids actively oppose fascism? Last I checked, nobody was opposing it in the US except for the EFF and a few lawyers trying to get in on a class action lawsuit or two.

Re:It's all about context

[pla]

the fiddlers are the ones who don't call me, because they think they can figure it out on their own, which is perfectly fine by me.

...And by the time they do call for help, they've mangled their system to the point where it won't even boot - meaning that instead of going through the tedious process of tracking down exactly what they broke, you can just re-RIS it and tell them not to try whatever they did last again. ;-)

Re:It's all about context

[Kluenitou]

A bit overkill for most people, don't you think? Should people not be considered capable of driving a car if they can't build one from the ground up? Ninety percent of the world wouldn't be able to drive, and a cab would cost so much we'd all still be riding horses. This is basically the same thing.

Agreed! I was beginning to think I was the only one on this thread that didn't think users need to have a computer science degree to be considered "literate"

Re:It's all about context

[adamjaskie]

Mom: I need to take my car in for an oil change. It has been six- or seven-thousand miles.
Me: You... did check your oil, right (her car burns oil, but not enough for there to be blue smoke - it's a Saturn)
Mom: No...
Me: OMGWTF. *checks oil* (dipstick is dry, covered in varnish deposits), *OMGWTF*

Mom: My car drives funny.
Me: *looks at car* Your front passenger tire is flat.
Mom: But they fixed that!

Re:It's all about context

[Oersoep]

What you're describing is consumer software literate.
It sure as hell is not a defenition or a context.

Save isn't always under File. The board computer of a communication satellite probably doesn't even have a GUI.

The phrase "computer litarate" is downright wrong.
Maybe "Common PC operation skills" would be better. It rules out configuration, hardware maintainance, system administration, all server administration, repair etc.

Re:It's all about context

[hackstraw]

6. If something you need to do on a frequent basis seems more difficult than it should be, then there is an easier, simpler way to do it.

People have the irrational belief that computers are inflexible, but its the users that are inflexible.

Re:It's all about context

[Anonymous Coward]

It _IS_ all about context. I've seen a lot of viewpoints, and a lot refuse to take context into account. Ok, take an English Literature professor. He's read hundreds -no- thousands of books. He understands English as far back as the earliest tomes. Now have him read another book that was published 25 years ago, so it doesn't confuse him with the latest vernacular - IBM's DOS 3.3 Manual. Actually, you could hand both the English and Greek versions to him, he would be able to understand NEITHER. Knowledge of English is insufficient to understand that book.

Say you've been an Office expert for the last 10 years. You can't even spell "C". But your boss wants you to write a program. Your illiteracy will show.

Say your brother is a "C" programmer. Been writing code forever. Whips out a program in minutes, and it works perfectly, every time. But his boss wants him to whip out a presentation with PowerPoint, to show how his latest creation works. Your brother can't even spell "PowerPoint". He gets fired because of his ineptitude.

It _IS_ all about context.

Re:It's all about context

[socerhed]

Likewise a person who has worked in different enviroments (MS, Mac,*nix) using different tools, (text editors, spread sheets, media players,compilers) is more computer literate than a person who has only ever used their win-box to email. They may know every hot-key short cut and trick that Outlook can handle but they're not really computer literate if they can't send an email on a mac or linux box if they have to.

Being literate isnt knowing all the different systems. This is the same as saying if you can read a book in english but you cant read the same book in spanish then your not literate. Being computer literate is just knowing how to read whatever interface your given and being able to interacting with it on a basic level.

Re:It's all about context

[elliotCarte]

While I generally agree with you, I think you might want to rephrase your 'definition'. It consists of five imperatives (commands). Have a look at a dictionary and try to find even one definition for anything that has even one imperative... any luck?

For example, instead of '1. Don't be afraid.' try something like '1. Having a lack of or ability to overcome fears concerning computers or computing.' Instead of '2. Learn the rules.' you might try something like '2. Aware of the generally accepted rules about computing and the reasoning therefore.'

To illustrate, consider this definition for 'literate' taken from dictionary.com

1.
a. Able to read and write.
b. Knowledgeable or educated in a particular field or fields.
2. Familiar with literature; literary.
3. Well-written; polished: a literate essay.

Consider how silly this would be in imperative form.

1.
a. Read or write something.
b. Learn something in a particular field or fields.
2. Familiarize yourself with literature; be literary.
3. Write something well; polish it.

Make any sense?

Re:It's all about context

[mdwstmusik]

Being literate isnt knowing all the different systems ... Being computer literate is just knowing how to read whatever interface your given and being able to interacting with it on a basic level.

So, someone who's read every Dr. Seuss book can be considered equally as literate as someone who's mastered Shakespeare, Tolstoy and Proust, right?

Re:It's all about context

[teknopagan]

That doesn't seem to be totally accurate. Remember, literacy is pretty much a baseline - if one is "literate" in the standard definition of the term, it means one can pick up any book written in their native language and read it. They may not grasp all the concepts therein, but they can at least read the words. In the same vein, if one is "computer literate," one should be able to sit down in front of a computer running their "native language" OS and software and use it. Unfortunately, in this day and age in the US, that pretty much means MS software.

Literacy != proficiency. For example, take two kids in public school. They can both read (surprisingly enough), but while one reads voraciously every day, the other only reads the bare minimum he must to get by in class. Both would be considered "literate," but while one scores an 800 on the verbal portion of his SAT, the other only scores a 400. The high scorer is a proficient reader, the low scorer is merely literate.

In most cases, when a job opening is posted, the level of computer skill is listed in the job description. If they merely specify "computer literacy," odds are good you'll be using Windows and MS Office, and if you know which side of the mouse is up and where the Start button is, you'll be fine. If they ask for specific computer-related skills, then they don't want just "literacy," they want proficiency in the specified fields.

That said - if I was applying for a tech job, and the interviewer looked at my resume and said that I was "computer literate," I'd probably punch him in the neck and leave. I hate interviewers.

Re:It's all about context

[martinultima]

You won't BELIEVE what I would do to get rid of Comic Sans MS, and not to mention my favorite thing in the world to hate – WordArt.

But what's really bad is when the teachers use it, too.

Re:It's all about context

[Savantissimo]

Hear, hear!
You might as well just be using a magic box if you don't understand the gist of transistors, lithographic processes, gates, registers, different architectures of processors (including not just CISC/ RISC but Harvard/von Neumann), analog-digital conversion, different types of memory, different types of binary coding and transmission, disk encoding and mechanics, electrical basics, power supply requirements, ESD mechanisms, OS structure; assembly language, interpreter and compiler elements and operation; OS, file and directory structures; basic data structure, information,and algorithm theory; functional, imperative and object-oriented approaches; debugging techniques, libraries, drivers; and command-line, graphical and keyboard interface conventions.

Re:It's all about context

[Anonymous Coward]

We need to remember whatever we teach we need to teach conceptuly. If you know file managment you can work on a mac linux or windows computer. If you start with file managment and teach people where things are at, it all will become easier. Its like staying someware and finding out where the bathroom is before the lights are turned out for the night.

Re:It's all about context

[Anonymous Coward]

So, someone who's read every Dr. Seuss book can be considered equally as literate as someone who's mastered Shakespeare, Tolstoy and Proust, right?

Don't be daft. You're bringing degree of literacy into a discussion of the binary condition of "literate" vs "illiterate". Both the Dr Seuss and the Shakespeare reader are indeed literate, but no one is suggesting they're equally proficient.

Re:It's all about context

[laughing rabbit]

I think that we are talking serious basics.

I have users I support that have been sitting at a keyboard : mouse : screen for ten years and do not know how to right click, they doubleclick everything, cannot Cntl-C --> Cntl-V, do not understand the difference between a shortcut: a file : a program, do not understand that their computer is part of a network, do not know that they have a home directory : personal folders...

...but they can change the colors in their display, delete menu entries so that shutdown is no longer an option, and forward jokester emails from outside to everyone in the office with a read reciept.

People choose what to know and learn.

Re:It's all about context

[renfrow]

Phew! At least I've got THIS covered.

Re:It's all about context

[yuri benjamin]

I have seen a number of resumes that boast "skills in MS Office" or similar. When I read this I think "Wow, this person learnt how to use something designed to be easy to use. Big deal.

I have a line on my resumé that reads:

  * Computer literate - including MS-Office, OpenOffice, StarOffice and inhouse apps.

I felt the need to spell that out because some HR drones filter out resumés that don't specify MS-Office. Sad but true.

Re:It's all about context

[HotmanParisHiltonKam]

Don't be afraid. If you don't know how to do something, poke around. You probably won't break anything.

I can see you haven't worked on a helpdesk before.

This is more a test of one's computer literacy; in fact the measure of computer literacy is inversely proportional to how many clicks it takes to completely destroy a newly installed system by "poking around."

Re:It's all about context

[Eskarel]

Nah, the fiddlers are the ones who go on windows update themselves and put on untested updates and tank their systems(true story happened, had to systematically roll back patches and applications till I could uninstall this thing). Not only that he did it on a shared computer as well as his own and made everyone elses life miserable.

Re:It's all about context

[ElleyKitten]

At out company, that wouldn't be the fault of the fiddlers. Our company doesn't test Windows Updates, we just set all the computers (even the servers!) to automatically update. It's great when people are working on applications on a server and then Windows Update decides to reboot it, but I'm too low on the totem poll to change it.

The following....

[ellem]

File Edit Blah Blah Blah Help

CTRL X
CTRL C
CTRL V

CTRL S

ALT F4 (for Windows)

Lef & Right click

Basic computer safety... stop clicking on everything, don't open attachments from people you don't know... no one in Nigera is sending you any money

The difference between Reboot and Logoff

Save often

Backup often

Then general idea of networking... not arcane TCP/IP, DHCP, DNS stuff... just the idea that other computers can be accessed by your computer and vice versa

TAB vs SPACE

Re:The following....

[notanatheist]

and spelling!

Re:The following....

[hahafaha]

Not really...

Computer literacy isapplicable in a particular field. For business, it is how to work your way around Windows, for a developer or sysadmin, around UNIX, BSD, or GNU/Linux, etc.

What you mentioned is more for the average user, and I would add some more stuff to it (word processing, web browsing, email, etc.)

Re:The following....

[An Onerous Coward]

I started on your tutorial, but two steps in Emacs closed on me.

Re:The following....

[MBCook]

An excellent list. I can only add a few small things to it.

First is the Ctrl-X/V/C. Make sure they understand copy/paste/cut. It is terribly useful and something that a surprisingly small number of computer users seem to know how to use.

READ DIALOG BOXES. This goes with the "no one from Nigeria" stuff. I can't tell you how many people I've helped with computers or errors or questions where the process of helping them consisted of "Did you read the dialog box?" "What does the dialog box say?" "So what should you do?" and that helped them.

Last, and most important UNDERSTAND THE FILESYSTEM. I've gotten my parents quite good at day-to-day use of the computer. It has taken YEARS. That said, I wouldn't consider them computer literate. This is one of the reasons.

So you want to find a file my parents saved. Where is it? That's right... My Documents. Not a sub-folder, just My Documents. That's where there are a few thousand files. Why? Because that is the default save location. Unless it's not. Some programs (AOL, etc) like to save somewhere else. So files saved from those programs are in those folders. Good luck finding anything, especially with the cruddy Windows search function. Spotlight would work well, but then again I gave them Google Desktop and they don't use it (it's easier to just scroll through the list of 3,000 files).

Introducing them to a few basic file types (TXT, JPG, HTML, DOC, XLS, ZIP, etc.) would also be a good step. So would the idea that you can delete a zip file after you unzip it. A decent chunk of the stuff in my parents My Documents folder? Zip files and their contents that Windows or AOL unzipped for them. But since that process is hidden, they don't know to delete the ZIP files or what they are.

In fact, they don't understand files and e-mail either. When you get an attachment in e-mail (say a picture) and you choose to view it and it gets saved to the hard drive... what do you do the next time you want to view that picture? That's right, you go to the e-mail and RE-SAVE the file with the default filename (helpfully with a "(1)" or some such at the end to ensure you have tons of spare copies) and let the right program open up automatically again. E-mail is a foreign land from the file system for all they know. AOL and it's tendencies to keep it's own weird folders and such have NOT helped at all in this regard.

In fact, warn them against AOL in the first place. I can not tell you how many things I've given up teaching because of AOL.

I'll post more if I can think of it. But basic use of the filesystem (especially creating folder and how you can nest folders and use that for organization) is critical.

Re:The following....

[SatanicPuppy]

Emacs? I can only assume you meant CTRL-X/V/C/S, because that's the only emacs-like thing out there...And it's not emacs. It's pretty much standard across all GUI word processors. Cut/Paste/Copy/Save

In Emacs that's CTRL-W/CTRL-Y/META-W/CTRL-X-CTRL-S

Re:The following....

[MBCook]

I just thought of another one. Make sure to teach them about URLs when you do the web. Someone else touched on teaching them this, but let me give some specific things.

How do you go to a website? Do you know what the #1 search on Yahoo is? It's "Google". My parent's computers are set up with Google as the home page. Do you know how they get just about anywhere? Searching google. Want to go to "favoritestore.com"? Well you type "favoritestore.com" in the Google search field and hit Search then click on the right one that comes up. They also use bookmarks. That one took a LONG TIME to break. I can not tell you how many people I've seen with that one.

Also, what is a home page in your web browser? That's the company that sells you your internet service! We subscribe to Google. We never get a bill from them. We do get bills from Comcast for Internet. But that little logical inconsistency doesn't seem to occur to them. I think I've got this one through to my parents too, but I'm not sure. I know it is (at least in part) related to AOL. The fact that you can change this to whatever you want is important and should be mentioned.

The last one for now is a personal pet-peeve of mine. I run into this in the otherwise very smart and computer savvy people in my high level CS classes.

This - / - is a FOREWORD-slash

This - \ - is a BACK-slash

One leans forward, the other leans backward. The terms are NOT INTERCHANGEABLE. The mean DIFFERENT things.

Of course this wouldn't be a problem is MS stuck with / as a path separator for DOS just like UNIX used, but that's another argument.

Re:The following....

[Anonymous Coward]

*woosh*. /. subscribers are always terrible.

Re:The following....

[vitamine73]

You make a very good point, I have encoutered the same problems trying to teach my mom. Of particular interest is this:

READ DIALOG BOXES. This goes with the "no one from Nigeria" stuff. I can't tell you how many people I've helped with computers or errors or questions where the process of helping them consisted of "Did you read the dialog box?" "What does the dialog box say?" "So what should you do?" and that helped them.

What is interesting here is that this applies pretty much to any teaching situation. I teach stastistics, ecology and evolution to undergrad biology students, mostly in problem solving situations. Most of the times one asks me a question, I manage to have them find the answer just by asking the right questions in return. Sometimes it's a simple case of "Did you re-read the problem" which is analogous to "Did you read the dialog box?", but you can also effectively apply this method with 'real' problem solving.

Re:The following....

[NoTailNoGoodnik]

I found that just too funny!

I just hate it when, after using EMACS for a while, I go to a Word document, want to move to the next line, and end up opening a new file! Egad! I want EMACS key bindings for Office!

Re:The following....

[sholden]

This - / - is a FOREWORD-slash

This - \ - is a BACK-slash

Having such long names for such common things (in computing) is madness.

What's wrong with slash and slosh respectively. That's what I've called them for as long as I remember, though I admit back when I was teaching C++ the confused looks before I explained my jargon on the faces of the second year students indicates it's far from universal... Do you say "exclamation mark" instead of "bang" too?

Re:The following....

[level_headed_midwest]

Emacs? Come on- everybody who's computer-literate uses vi.

Oh, somebody had to say it. I actually use GNU Nano as my console-based text editor.

Re:The following....

[MBCook]

Well, I tend to shorten them to "slash" and "backslash".

As for the exclamation point, that's what I tend to call it. I would have to think for a while if you called it a "bang" to me. But if I'm describing a statement to someone that needs it in programming (such a "if (!condition || func(x))" then I just say "not". The person knows what I'm talking about.

Re:The following....

[Lectrik]

You beat me to the core of my definition, computer literate should mean you can follow tech support over the phone without having to ask things like "Where's the any key" and "How do I double click"
It should be basic hardware recognition (this is my mouse, this is my gun. This is for fighting, this is for fun) and basic GUI conventions (Menus, left/right/double clicking, icons) [basically anything that shows up on both windows and mac [if someone isn't computer literate there a very small chance it'll be anything beyond either]. ]
They do also need to know a few good practices like save/backup often (like checking your oil was covered in driver's ed)
and the basic interweb scams should be covered now too.

Re:The following....

[weierstrass]

>Last, and most important UNDERSTAND THE FILESYSTEM. I've gotten my parents quite good at day-to-day use of the computer. It has taken YEARS.

The fact that noones parents understand the filesystem is an indicator of exactly one thing
THE FILE/FOLDER METAPHOR IS BROKEN
Yes, the whole idea of 'files' is only a metaphor. Even in Unix. A very useful metaphor, sure. But it's not necessary or helpful anymore for the average user.

It's great that files exist, and in *nix-likes are the basis for everything, sure. But the user doesn't need to see these pesky files anymore, they are just confusing him. He should know be one level of abstraction up - working with something we could call a 'document', for want of a better term. He doesn't need to know if his webpage consists of multiple files. It's just a document. If he has the same piece of content in multiple formats, he doesn't need to know that either. It's just a document. He should be able to preserve multiple versions restore points of his document, w/o worrying about having different files with different names. It's just a document.

Fact: most techies understand treelike structures well, and did even before hierarchical filesystems became common currency. For obvious reasons.

Fact: most people's mom encountered her first treelike structure the first day she typed a document in Word, and wanted to save it.

MS realized as far back as W95 that the filesystem hierarchy wasn't particularly intuitive to the average member of the W95 target market. Rather than do something revolutionary and innovative which would have made everyone's lives easier the last 10 years, they mucked around with it a little bit, made some cosmetic changes, tried to please both the new people and the experienced people, and ended up fixing not much, and breaking things which were at least consistent in DOS.

My dad figured out that since he had 2 versions of the folder 'My Documents', one contained in My Computer, and one not (on the desktop), one was storing his files locally, and the other was storing them somewhere else, not on his computer. He even renamed the folder in the C: drive "My documents here" so he could tell them apart. (on winME btw)

This isn't an obligatory MS-bash. IMHO, it's a lot more shocking that no linux distro/desktop manager, has tried to sort this out. They are the ones that have the opportunity to make fairly sweeping changes. Linux users would catch on fast, appreciate an elegant solution, and still be competent to see 'behind the scenes' to the actual filesystem if desired. The same goes for Apple to some extent, and for some slightly different reasons. MS themselves have their hands much more tied as to what they could change, now that everyone has 10 yrs experience of Windows doing it the dumb way.

In a previous slashdot story about similar stuff, someone said that their mom used a single word document to type everything, and printed out the relevant pages each time.

Older people are not stupid, but they are being made to feel stupid by stupid designers, programmers and documenters, and as technology becomes more important this is more and more damaging to their lives.

* to all the older slashdot users, computer able seniors, and slashdotters with techie parents, sorry to make generalizations but they are broadly true..

Re:The following....

[Osty]

They also use bookmarks. That one took a LONG TIME to break. I can not tell you how many people I've seen with that one.

What's wrong with using bookmarks? Perhaps you should say overuse of bookmarks without any sort of organization is bad, but bookmarks by themselves are not. I'd say the real problem here is the browser (any browser). When I'm reading a book, a bookmark is temporary to keep my place when I come back to the book. Once I've come back, the bookmark is gone. Perhaps browsers need a single-use bookmark concept?

Organization of bookmarks is painful in most browsers. Why not couple a bookmark system with meta data from a search engine to automatically categorize your bookmarks? That would require some work from the search engine to categorize a web site, which could be difficult. A manual tagging system would be a good first start, especially if it was easily searchable (the idea of bookmarks as menu items just isn't going to work in the long run), but the fundamental truth about any manual organization system is that users aren't going to use it. Right now, I'd love to have a combination of IE7's "Favorites Center" and Firefox's Bookmarks Sidebar. The former shows and hides like a menu, but in the normal sidebar place (it can be pinned in place, but my point here is that I don't want something taking up valuable screen space when I need it only infrequently). The latter must always be visible to use it, but has a nice search feature. If IE7 would put a word-wheeling search on their Favorites Center, I'd be a happy man.

It'd also be nice to have a better history view, as well. I might remember that I visited some page on Sunday, but unless I can remember the title of the page I'm still going to have to manually search through the history. Firefox is better about this, but search results don't tell me when I visited a page.

Of course this wouldn't be a problem is MS stuck with / as a path separator for DOS just like UNIX used, but that's another argument.

It's also an invalid argument, as DOS used \ for a good reason. At the time, DOS (and CP/M on which the concepts of DOS were loosely based) used / to specify parameters to applications. Since / was already in use, \ was chosen as the path separator. If they had used - for parameters, they probably also would've used / for path separation, but then again they may have gone with : like Apple. / is really only universal as a path separator today because of the web (or more specifically, URIs). Maybe it was chosen because of its *nix heritage, but that just reflects the experiences of the people writing the original RFCs rather than some intrinsic value of / as a path separator.

To make matters worse, Windows Explorer, Internet Explorer, and Firefox (and anything that uses the standard file dialog common controls, as those embed Explorer) don't much care whether you use / or \. Try it out. Open up the run box and type "c:/program files". It works. Open up IE or Firefox and type "http:\\slashdot.org". That also works. so yes, you can interchange / with \ more or less indiscriminately (cmd.exe cares, but are your parents really going to use cmd.exe? I didn't think so ...).

Re:The following....

[Maserati]

Pretty much, yeah. This technique really requires being in a position of authority (possibly that derived from being an authority). Try that with, oh lets pick an example entirely at random, a touchy executive assistant and you hear about it from the IT director and HR come review time.

Yeah, that does usually work. It's really a very effective technique.

</bitter>

Re:The following....

[Mad_Rain]

I started on your tutorial, but two steps in Emacs closed on me.

Which is why the true test of computer literacy is this: Know your vi commands!

:wq!

Re:The following....

[tvon]

I do all my programming with 'cat'.

Sissy.

Re:The following....

[Anonymous Coward]

Emacs all the way.

It's annoying, when I'm in something like word typing some stuff for school, I want to use the move line commands like Meta-F/B and Control-A/E, but I can't.

Re:The following....

[tvon]

What the hell is wrong with bookmarks?

Do I need to give an argument here?

Re:The following....

[Schraegstrichpunkt]

CTRL S

What about CTRL Q?

Re:The following....

[telbij]

The fact that noones parents understand the filesystem is an indicator of exactly one thing
THE FILE/FOLDER METAPHOR IS BROKEN
Yes, the whole idea of 'files' is only a metaphor. Even in Unix. A very useful metaphor, sure. But it's not necessary or helpful anymore for the average user.

I'm gonna have to disagree with you on this one. People have been using hierarchical paper files for hundreds if not thousands of years. It's a basic organizational system, and is a minimum for working sanely with large numbers of files. The confusing thing is that the user's files are saved in the same filesystem as all the system and application stuff, so the hierarchy itself is overwhelming. I can understand the need to separate those.

Older people are not stupid, but they are being made to feel stupid by stupid designers, programmers and documenters, and as technology becomes more important this is more and more damaging to their lives.

This is a common argument, but I think you underestimate how hard it is to make things usable. The trick is to make things as simple as you can but still have the necessary features. I think Apple has been hitting a sweet spot here for a while with iLife.

The problem is essentially that many many people do not have the patience to figure out a complex system. They approach a program with the desire to do one thing, and the only way they could be satisfied is if there is a big button on the screen that says "Do the Thing". However, that same user may potentially want to do 100 different things at different times, and they certainly won't be satisfied by a screen filled with one hundred buttons. Hence the purpose of menus, wizards, hierarchies, preferences and all the other complications us geeks know and love.

There are a large number of people who do not want to think about how to do something or where one might logically find some aspect of a computer program. These people get anxious just looking at a dialog box. They do not enjoy figuring things out.

I'm sorry, but you are not going to design an interface that meets the lowest common denominator and is still useful. It just ain't gonna happen. To get to that point what we need is full-blown artificial intelligence. In other words, a replacement for the techie that they call on the phone to tell them how to do something. It's so easy to blame the designer, and I agree a lot of interfaces are horrendous, but the reality is that there is a certain amount of irreducible complexity inherent any moderately useful general purpose computer system. People who want to do one thing and have no patience for learning any context should be given appliances that do the one thing they want. That's the only way to make things usable for them.

Re:The following....

[Hott of the World]

What's wrong with slash and slosh respectively. That's what I've called them for as long as I remember, though I admit back when I was teaching C++ the confused looks before I explained my jargon on the faces of the second year students indicates it's far from universal... Do you say "exclamation mark" instead of "bang" too?

Well, yeah. People have enough to grasp without having to worry about the jargon. Then again, I learned quite a bit my first class.

(Scheme, Head Recursion/Tail Recursion, Trees, Graphs, Hashes, Maps, Linked Lists, Structures, Data Analysis and Definitions, Functions, Unix, Pine, Tin, SSH, Putty, etc)

Considering I never programmed before, it was nerve racking.

Re:The following....

[isj]

TAB vs. SPACE

vs. hanging indent.

The difference between format and presentation. Eg. the difference between a .doc file and a .jpg file. You would be amazed of the people who rescale a .bmp picture inside word. They should know /try at least to programs for handling each major file type. Some people do not even know that they have a choice.

I once gave up having a T-shirt made with a picture on it because the shop could not handle .jpg or .bmp pictures - they only knew how to handle .doc

Re:The following....

[masterzora]

I think the GP wasn't stating that there was any problem with bookmarks. The problem was in bookmarks and Google search being the only ways his parents know how to navigate the web. Unlike merely using bookmarks as a convenience, that's a serious problem.

Re:The following....

[Meski]

Bang? Using a meaningless word means you spend more time explaining it. Everyone knows that ! is an exclamation-mark. A tiny minority know it as bang. Using jargon terms doesn't help people become computer literate.

Re:The following....

[Anonymous Coward]

I think users just need to learn what they are and how they are made... Today I had a user call and say she didn't have access to a particular web application after changing computers, and it turned out she just didn't have a bookmark for it in IE.

Re:The following....

[Osty]

I think the GP wasn't stating that there was any problem with bookmarks. The problem was in bookmarks and Google search being the only ways his parents know how to navigate the web. Unlike merely using bookmarks as a convenience, that's a serious problem.

But why does it need to be? If users use a product in a way that the developers didn't intend, is the user wrong or is the product trying to solve the wrong problem? I went on a tangent proposing some possible solutions that don't involve telling the parents to suck it up and live with it because that's the way it is. Maybe the GP should suck it up and fix the browser rather than the user? (in jest, of course, but I think my ideas are good. Of course, I don't think my shit stinks, either ...)

That's not to say that users are always right. They're often very, very wrong. But if somebody is using a piece of software in a way that's natural to them and you see that as a problem, the issue is more likely that the software simply isn't tackling the right set of problems.

Re:The following....

[weierstrass]

>People have been using hierarchical paper files for hundreds if not thousands of years.

Paper files are not kept within folders within folders within folders. One or two levels of hierarchy are normal, more is rare, if you discount 'organizational' separation, such as 'A-G', 'H-S' and 'T-Z', which are dealt with separately in computer based filing systems. I'm talking here about the files the average person has in their own office at work or at home, not what you might deal with if you work (as a specialist) in a data archive or similar, of a large organization.

>There are a large number of people who do not want to think about how to do something or where one might logically find some aspect of a computer program.

>They do not enjoy figuring things out.

These two lines give away what I dislike and disagree with in the attitude of you and many people like you, including a lot of the people I would blame for bad interface and software organization.

>There are a large number of people who do not want to think about how to do something or where one might logically find some aspect of a computer program.

Yes, good for them. These people are more interested in getting on with whatever their job actually is, then in 'exploring' their computers to find out where everything is. Stop trying to make everyone think like you, and instead focus your skills on making it easier for people to do what they do want to do.

Re:The following....

[honkycat]

Years ago with some old version of Office (maybe 98 or so), I suffered from that problem. I was able to reconfigure most of the important keyboard shortcuts so Word actually felt like Emacs. As I recall, the multi-key commands (C-x C-s, etc) didn't work, but the major editing/navigation did. It worked pretty well, though some of the shortcut collisions got annoying (e.g., the default Word setting of C-b for 'bold' conflicts with navigating the cursor back one char). Overall, it was a pain to set up and ultimately not worth it...

Re:The following....

[zanglang]

I started on vi and now I can't close it... Help? :'(

Re:The following....

[raoul666]

They also use bookmarks. That one took a LONG TIME to break. I can not tell you how many people I've seen with that one.

I must have missed the memo on this one. What's wrong with bookmarks?

Re:The following....

[shoffsta]

I do all my programming with 'cat'.

no, no, no, you got it all wrong!
Everybody knows that ed is the standard text editor!

Re:The following....

[Anonymous Coward]

Ctrl+X/Ctrl+C closes Emacs. That would be the joke.

Re:The following....

[Anonymous Coward]

>Do you say "exclamation mark" instead of "bang" too?

Yep. I suspect "bang" is pretty much a US-centric thing (I'm in aus).

Re:The following....

[MoogMan]

Haha, well I managed to get through 4 steps before VI froze on me!

Re:The following....

[Anonymous Coward]

>>There are a large number of people who do not want to think about
>> how to do something or where one might logically find some
>> aspect of a computer program.

> Yes, good for them. These people are more interested in getting
> on with whatever their job actually is, then in 'exploring'
> their computers to find out where everything is. Stop trying to
> make everyone think like you, and instead focus your skills on
> making it easier for people to do what they do want to do.

To use any tool, first you need to take some time to LEARN how to use it. But in some parts of the world people seem to think that they should can get everything by paying money for it.

There are some things that you can never get without some intellectual involvement, even if you blame your lack of success on the UI developer instead of you own incompetence.

If you can't use a word processor and don't have time to learn to use it, than take a pen and a piece of paper and write your things by hand. If you can work faster with the word processor, but still can't use it properly, than shut up and be happy because you've got a computer and can finish your job quicker than those people who haven't got this opportunity a hundred years ago!

But don't expect the software to do _your_ job by itself!

Re:The following....

[ElleyKitten]

That's not to say that users are always right. They're often very, very wrong. But if somebody is using a piece of software in a way that's natural to them and you see that as a problem, the issue is more likely that the software simply isn't tackling the right set of problems.

If the user is only using bookmarks, then they're stuck only going to websites they've bookmarked before. If they only know how to use google and not the address bar, then instead of typing mail.yahoo.com and getting to their email they type "yahoo mail" into google (or possibly just "mail" or "email") and then have to look through the options and hopefully click the correct one. The address bar is much faster, and firefox's is even very forgiving of not typing correct URLs - "yahoo mail", for instance, goes directly to yahoo mail.

The problem isn't the browser here, the problem here is users not knowing the browser. If my car went really slowly because I would put it in 1st instead of Drive, then the problem would be me, not that cars need to have a faster 1st gear. Simularly, the problem here is that the parents need to learn to use the address bar, not that someone needs to program them single-use bookmarks or something.

Re:The following....

[houghi]

Backup often

What is even more importand then backing up is knowing how to restore. With a standard program re-opening it will be enough. Yet I have seen people looking for their data, because they did not know where it was saved or did not know how to restore after a crash.

Broken tapes, blank backupdrived, unreadable floppies, ...
I asume most here have seen it all and yet it is often forgotten.

So ask yourself: when was the latest succesfull restore that you did? Don't trust your backups, test them.

Re:The following....

[dhasenan]

And you just lost an hour's work.

Re:The following....

[Anonymous Coward]

My favorite story in this regard is when we were walking our salespeople through some updates we needed them to make in short order. We were doing it via conference calls with 10 of them at a time and they just weren't getting the slash vs. backslash idea.

We finally figured out how to put it in terms that were in their frame of reference. "Ok - you have a martini. If the swizzle stick is on the right side of the glass, it's a slash. If it's on the left side, it's a backslash."

Worked like a charm.

Re:The following....

[Anonymous Coward]

pffft. I hard wire everything that i need to write such as this message.

Re:The following....

[eht]

>Paper files are not kept within folders within folders within folders.

Not folders within folders within folders, but close enough, documents which are in folders sometimes in other folders, then in a cabinet, which is in a specific place in a room, the room is within a wing of a building, which is in a building, which is on a street, which is in a city, which is in a state, which is in a country. So far we don't have to specify which world.

Re:The following....

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe if you told them it was a 'Forward' slash, it might help. So, once we've got computer literacy sorted, we can start on the other kind...

Re:The following....

[SatanicPuppy]

Heh. It's actually kinda funny too. I plead 14 hour workday as my excuse.

--A

Re:The following....

[hackstraw]

To make matters worse, Windows Explorer, Internet Explorer, and Firefox (and anything that uses the standard file dialog common controls, as those embed Explorer) don't much care whether you use / or \. Try it out. Open up the run box and type "c:/program files". It works. Open up IE or Firefox and type "http:\\slashdot.org". That also works. so yes, you can interchange / with \ more or less indiscriminately

Microsoft has subtly screwed us on the whole forward/backward slash thing.

Check out this URL: http://www.microsoft.com/windows/\/\/\/\/\/\defaul t.mspx. Now try that on a UNIX web server.

Forward and backward slashes are _almost_ interchangeable in Visual Studio, even with #includes and fopen() type calls.

To screw over the people even more, I just learned that in Windows XP, you have to precede a network printer with "http://". Yes, the printer does have an embedded web server, but you use that to configure the device, not print to it. And to make it even more clear to the now confused user, when you use File::Print from the menu, it shows the printer now as "\\http://printer.example.com". WTF?

Honestly, one of the ways to get people to be computer literate is for them to use consistent software that does not engage you in a game to alter your behavior in order for you to outthink the software in order to get your desired goal to happen. If that sentence makes any sense to you, then keep reading.

Products like Word that go behind your back and reformat things are a step backwards for computer literacy. Would you ever work with someone or even talk with them if they came behind you and corrected everything you did as you were doing it? Why should software do this?

If you want computer literacy, start at the command line. Its tough nowadays, but that is where consistency ends, and even it has some inconsistencies. Then go to the Mac UI. Do NOT introduce Microsoft products in the mix. I know that most people here are Microsoft sympathizers, but all in all they really make horrible software. Especially from the end user point of view.

Re:The following....

[nihaopaul]

a stupid question but what do you call `:` and while you're at it whats `;`?

if i had to say `http://somelinktoproxy.com:8080` over the phone i'd say it as either of the following:

http(doubledot)(forwardslash)(forwardslash)somelin ktoproxy(dot)com(doubledot)8080
http(vertical-eye-poker)(forwardslash)(forwardslas h)somelinktoproxy(dot)com(vertical-eye-poker)8080

dont make fun or i'll claim i'm not a native english speaker, i guess i was sick the day they taught them.

Re:The following....

[KayElle]

I work for a government office where 2/3rds of my end users are over 60. Most meander their way through work, but I have a few who simply aren't computer literate in any way shape or form. They engage in what I call magical thinking: a computer is just a form of magic wand, you do prescribed things, and something happens. But no understanding of the causality. First, AMEN on the file system. I have at least three users where I work who simply can't (and won't) comprehend what a file is. Files are saved "in word" or "in acrobat" or even better "in the program" (they don't even know what program is running, "the program" is the file they opened) and no amount of explaining will get past that. File systems -- locations, local and network locations, the difference between a program, a file format, and a location How to organize files. Data manipulation basics -- how to find things in menus, how to cut, paste, and copy. Basic Office Applications -- Word Processing, Spreadsheet, Database, Email. Just the basics. Set a margin in a word processor, format text. Add up a column in a spreadsheet. Internet -- Basic defensive browsing aka how not to click on every popup, how to find things with a search engine, how to recognize a website url and differentiate it from an email address.

Re:The following....

[Anonymous Coward]

Ooops. I failed to meet the criteria. Thanks for sneakilly tricking me into closing my browser (ALT-F4)

Re:The following....

[sholden]

The url on my posts might give away the fact that I was in aus when I picked up such terms.

Re:The following....

[ByteGuerrilla]

"You must be very proud of yourself."

Re:The following....

[weierstrass]

I get your point and it is a very good one.

This is from a story in the Guardian by a computer salesman complaining about his customers

One evening, I sent away a smiling lady with a new PC, assuring her that it would work with her existing monitor. It did. Later in the week she returned red-faced, her ears spouting steam. She'd lost all her files.

"I thought they stayed in the screen!" she screamed

http://shopping.guardian.co.uk/computers/story/0,, 1720816,00.html

Re:The following....

[sholden]

I wasn't talking about becoming computer literate I was asking the poster of the post I replied to what they used, out of pure and simple interest.

It was one of the words I did have to explain to my students when I used it out of habit early in the C++/Unix course - sh-bang-slash-bin and all that. I made an effort to not use it when teaching, but I'm sure I did without noticing anyway.

Re:The following....

[Anonymous Coward]

':' = colon
';' = semicolon

Re:The following....

[kiwimate]

Sure you are, it's called a document management system.

Theory: rather than navigating somewhat arbitrary and capricious folder hierarchies, categorize or index your documents. You can then search based on categories at the simplest, or if you're a more advanced user you can use Boolean search logic.

Problem in practise: most DMS implementations are necessarily installed and configured by experts based on consulting with business sponsors. People find it really hard to abstract away from the well-known file folder system and end up implementing something that's an unconscious copy of that very system they're trying to replace.

But to return to the larger question...most answers on this thread are whimsical pedantry on the part of whining egomaniacal geeks. Here's the thing: it's context sensitive. Computer literacy means something different to an employer looking for a receptionist versus a university wanting to ensure a minimum standard for incoming first year computer science students. Are you attempting to answer the original poster's question, or the larger debate at hand?

Re:The following....

[Demerara]

The two key skills for file management are:

(1) Give EVERYTHING a name which reflects its content. How many times do you see My Documents with hundreds of Document 1, Document 2....Document N?

So, teach the newbies how to give their files a name "Nephew Birthday.doc", "Church Choir Meeting Notice.doc" etc.

Then (and just as important)

(2) Show them how to search for files with simple keywords. In Windoze, it's F3 and simple keywords like 'Nephew' or "Church Choir'.

That, or put Google Desktop on there and show them how to use that.

Re:The following....

[masterzora]

They're free to use the browser as they wish, but if the reason is because they don't understand a basic concept that is usually considered part of computer literacy, it's an issue.

Re:The following....

[MBCook]

You're right, there is nothing wrong with bookmarks. I meant the "google search for favoritestore.com" part. I then remembered that they also used bookmarks (because the google search thing was weird to them, as it should have been) so I added that statement. I just added it the wrong place.

Re:The following....

[Ruie]

Hence the purpose of menus, wizards, hierarchies, preferences and all the other complications us geeks know and love.

Not everyone. The problem with menus, wizards and preferences is that instead of one "Big button" they make a 100 "tiny buttons" - but still one function each.

If "Big button" is not good enough (sometimes it is - think "Start" on a paper copier), then 100 of these will not do either.

The proper computer interface is the command line - which lets one talk to the AI within the computer in its own language and a canvas-like widget that allows to interact with geometric objects.

Re:The following....

[AdamHaun]

Fact: most techies understand treelike structures well, and did even before hierarchical filesystems became common currency. For obvious reasons.

Fact: most people's mom encountered her first treelike structure the first day she typed a document in Word, and wanted to save it.

Fact: Most people are perfectly capable of dealing with the concept of a nested container. If I tell someone that some dinner plates are on the bottom shelf in a cabinet in a house, or that a calculator is in a backpack in a locker at school, they don't need to call tech support to understand what I mean.

Re:The following....

[Anonymous Coward]

":" - colon
";" - semicolon
now the "`" single-quote character you used instead of the apostrophe "'" or double-quote """ that most people use - that's tricky.

Also: "&" - ampersand - was originally an "et" symbol (latin for "and"), a cursive "E" with a little crossbar on the lower point to make a "t"

"*" - asterisk, "splat"(computer jargon only)
"^" - caret
"#" - "hash" or "pound sign"
"!" - exclamation point or "bang"(computer jargon only)
"-" - dash, not the same to typesetting nazis as an "em-dash", which is wider.
"~" - tilde (usually pronounced "tildee")
"_" - underscore

Anyone have better names for "@" (at) or "|" (pipe)?

Re:The following....

[Anonymous Coward]

The thing is: every program expects _something_ from the user: the vocabulary. Whether it's te asumption that the user knows what a button is or what a file system is. The bigger the vocabulary of the user, the more control the user has. It's the same as being able to better communicate with someone with another language. So: if you assume the user knows what a filesystem is and knows how it works, that will give the user more power to communicate with the application, giving him more control, so the user can better manage his workflow.

The question is: how big do you, as a developer, expect the vocabulary of the user to be? Now, for decades programs expect less "vocabulary" from the user. This has worked out great. But now we are at point that we might make the vocabulary to small. Programs no longer expect the user to know how a filesystem works and try to hide it. This works as long the user only works in one program, because every time the same folder will open. But if they are out of that application, they are completely disorientated. They will ask themselves: where have all my files gone?

The point is: programs should expect that users know how filesystems work. I.e.: always show the whole tree: don't hide the tree, instead, make the tree simpler. Of course all the users should again learn how filesystems work, but it will be a big benefit, even for the average Joe user. No more: where have all my files gone? A user always needs to know: where am I, just like a website.

Or, instead of hiding the file system, something entirely different should be done, like the soups in the Apple Newton, smart folders or other interesting things.

(Side note: talking about vocabulary: my native language is Ducth, so please forgive my n00b mistakes in writing English)

Re:The following....

[luna69]

I still have a mental hold-over from early programming on my Apple II: whenever I see "$a" my brain reads it as "string 'a' ". The "$" character will always be "string" to me, even though it's not used specifically to denote strings anymore. My Java-coding friends look at me weird when I'm reading something outloud and accidentally say "string such-and-such". I have to back up and say "dollar-sign such-and-such".

Re:The following....

[fishbot]

Bang? Using a meaningless word means you spend more time explaining it. Everyone knows that ! is an exclamation-mark

Nonsense. Everybody knows that ! is 'pling' and ? is 'query'.

Also, it's not forward-slash, it's just slash. There was never a need to indicate direction until backslash was invented, and seeing as backslash indicates that it is the opposite of a slash ... why the need for the excessive prefix?

I do like slosh though ... I might adopt that one.

Re:The following....

[fishter]

The problem with "#" being called "pound sign" is that in the UK we use a "£" as a pound sign. Also, I have heard the "#" being called "square"

Re:The following....

[telbij]

These two lines give away what I dislike and disagree with in the attitude of you and many people like you, including a lot of the people I would blame for bad interface and software organization.

Yes, good for them. These people are more interested in getting on with whatever their job actually is, then in 'exploring' their computers to find out where everything is. Stop trying to make everyone think like you, and instead focus your skills on making it easier for people to do what they do want to do.

Okay, I'm sorry I didn't soften up my rhetoric (this is /. after all), but you are projecting onto me. I am not trying to make anyone think like me. I'm making an observation.

First of all, I help tons of friends and family members with computers. Some of them are interested in what's possible to do with their computer, and some of them are only interested in the task at hand. Either way I don't get impatient with them or use jargon or talk over their head in any way. So I'm not in any way blaming the user.

Secondly, I worked on a large student union website for many years. With the amount of content and the diverse reasons people would come to the site, it was very difficult to create an effective design for everyone. We did frequent usability testing and progressively re-organized the site as we added content. It's a work in progress, but is definitely one of the best sites at that University. The point here is that if you have a zillion things to organize and fit into a design, that makes it inherently difficult to make an easy to use design that works for everyone.

Don't try to minimize the amount of effort that goes into interface design and say that designers just need to work harder to make everything work for everyone all the time. If you have some brilliant idea for a one-size-fits-all solution then please share, but don't go assuming that people just don't care about the users due some ingrained ideological bitterness.

Re:The following....

[daenris]

Or sharp... as in C#... used from musical notation where the # is a sharp symbol.

Re:The following....

[daenris]

That's not true at all for network printers on Windows XP. I use almost exclusively network printers on my computer here at work, and to set them up I connect using \\serveraddress\printername

Re:The following....

[daenris]

And how do you think the Firefox address bar does that? It uses a search engine. I believe (though you can probably change this in the settings) that it uses Google. So typing yahoo mail into the firefox address bar is the same as typing yahoo mail into google and clicking I'm feeling lucky. It takes you to the first result, which happens to be mail.yahoo.com.

Re:The following....

[poot_rootbeer]

Fact: most people's mom encountered her first treelike structure the first day she typed a document in Word, and wanted to save it.

Whereas before, if Mom had a piece of paper she wanted to save, she went to the file cabinet, then opened a particular drawer of the cabinet, then opened a particular folder located in that drawer and placed the paper in it. The logical jump from that to the more abstract "collections of collections within a collection" generic tree model is not a large one.

Re:The following....

[poot_rootbeer]

My dad figured out that since he had 2 versions of the folder 'My Documents', one contained in My Computer, and one not (on the desktop), one was storing his files locally, and the other was storing them somewhere else, not on his computer.

Microsoft is solely to blame for this one. 'My Documents' isn't even a real place, it's a symlink to 'C:\Some\Ridiculously\Wordy\And\Different\In\Each\ OS\Version\Path\My Documents'.

And don't get me started on 'My Computer', which can be accessed both as a parent and as a child of the C: drive.

Apple GENERALLY is better about making the apparent location of a resource match it actual location in the filesystem (though the OS X Dock is an exception).

Re:The following....

[ElleyKitten]

I'm not saying search engines are bad, they're great! However, if a user is wasteing their time if they have to go to the search engine (by clicking the home icon, or opening a new browser, or whatever), type something, then click search (instead of even clicking "I'm feeling lucky" or something) and clicking on the first thing instead of just typing the thing into the address bar in the first place. Also, not knowing about the address bar prevents them from being about to learning about websites offline and being able to go later. If I want you to visit my website and you don't understand the address how do I tell you how to get there? There's so much that users can't do or could only do much slower without the address bar that it's really imperative that the users learn how to use the address bar. That isn't the browser's problem, that's a user problem.

Re:The following....

[Anonymous Coward]

This - / - is a FOREWORD-slash

Hmmmm, "Forward" slash may work better!
All this talk of literacy and the most common and annoying mistakes made in the English language keep popping up.

From Wikipedia:
A foreword is a literary device that is often found at the beginning of a book or other piece of literature, before the introduction, and written by someone other than the author of the book.

Re:The following....

[Blakey Rat]

DOS uses \ for backwards-compatibility with older CPM programs that used / to specify parameters. They aren't compatible with Unix path separators for the same reason (say) Apple Classic OS used : as a separator: It was arbitrary, and the concept of cross-compatibility didn't exist until much later. (When did Apple decide they should open DOS/Windows files? 1990?)

The reason Unix stuff is "standard" now is because the Internet happened to be implemented with Unix servers. If the Internet had happened to be implemented with Macintosh servers, we'd all be typing in http/::slashdot.org:happy. It's all arbitrary, and compatibility didn't matter.

Re:The following....

[yarbo]

I learned that @ = atmark a long time ago. I found this while googling which has some alternate names. this is also quite interesting.

Re:The following....

[weierstrass]

It seems like everyone has made this point to me (using trees for data organization in the real world), so I'll try and reply to it here.

A few points concerning the validity of this comparison: Firstly, one or two levels of nesting are normal in the real world. 3 levels are rare. Secondly, the 'tree' in this case is just an abstraction - you don't need to understand a hierarchical structure to find your file in the filing cabinet, you just need to understand the mechanics of everyday objects, and see that the piece of paper stays where you put it. There is no way of understanding where your electronic file is, w/o navigating the hierarchy. Thirdly, the metaphor breaks down in many ways for books and filing cabinets. You can't take the third drawer of the filing cabinet and place it inside the second folder of the top drawer. Nor can one usually take all the 'meat' chapters of various cookery books and bind them into a new book.

Re:The following....

[Shadarr]

This - / - is a FOREWORD-slash This - \ - is a BACK-slash

I had a teacher who was writing a URL on the board and refered to all the slashes as backslashes. Granted he was teaching photography, but still.

Re:The following....

[ElephanTS]

Older people are not stupid, but they are being made to feel stupid by stupid designers, programmers and documenters, and as technology becomes more important this is more and more damaging to their lives.

I agree with that so much. But, when I tried to outline that to my parents, they think I"m calling them stupid by it. Like 'they're so stupid they need special 'for stupid' software'. Nope, not the point Mum and Dad - why don't you read slashdot more often?

Re:The following....

[jp10558]

I'm pretty sure there might be an extension that does this. Anyway, in Opera, bookmarks have a description field that is autofilled based on the metatag of the page IIRC. The manage bookmarks tab or panel has a quicksearch field that also searches that.

And don't most history views show the date visited? Granted, searching by date is more like browsing for/by date, but it's listed. Opera in quicksearch of the history tab/panel will search by title I think, and shows the date visited on the right, with # of visits.

Re:The following....

[jp10558]

: - colon, ; - semi-colin. - is a hyphen.

Re:The following....

[Osty]

I'm pretty sure there might be an extension that does this. Anyway, in Opera, bookmarks have a description field that is autofilled based on the metatag of the page IIRC. The manage bookmarks tab or panel has a quicksearch field that also searches that.

It's been a while since I've used Opera (I played around with one of the 9.0 betas when it was briefly supported by live.com, but live.com has since broken their Opera support and I haven't bothered to fire up Opera again), so it's very likely that it does what I want and I just don't know it.

And don't most history views show the date visited? Granted, searching by date is more like browsing for/by date, but it's listed. Opera in quicksearch of the history tab/panel will search by title I think, and shows the date visited on the right, with # of visits.

History view without date makes no sense, obviously :). However, what I was calling out is that IE has no search and Firefox's search doesn't group results by date (when no search filter is active, everything is properly grouped by date). Once again, it sounds like Opera does exactly what I want, here. Now if only more websites didn't fail in Opera (usually through that website's fault and not Opera's).

Re:The following....

[Sylver Dragon]

I have to agree on the slash thing. It would be nice for people to know this one, especially if you are doing any sort of phone support. I've just started saying "blah blah - backslash, the one without the question mark on the key ... blah blah" Most of my users seem to get this and it has cut down on the number of errors where I tell people to use "domain backlash username" when accessing OWA.

Re:The following....

[hackstraw]

People have been using hierarchical paper files for hundreds if not thousands of years. It's a basic organizational system, and is a minimum for working sanely with large numbers of files.

Yes, I completely agree. Not necessarily hierarchical though. Lets say I own a doctors office. The patient files are not hierarchically above the payroll files or the inventory files. But they all are discrete and need to be organized by some human decipherable means. Type and date for inventory. Name for patient and payroll files. That kind of stuff.

However, most people simply are not that complex or organized. Even though I don't balance my checkbook, I have my bank do it for me with online banking. Many people pay hundreds or even thousands of dollars a year that they don't have because they cannot keep their bank book in order. These same people either now own a computer or at least people like them will.

OS X has this file separation pretty clear, and the best of any OS that I know of. The finder in OS X has a left hand side that has a separated list of local and networked drives, then a list of common folders with no hierarchy to them what so ever. There is desktop. Your user directory, or $HOME directory in UNIX speak, the Applications folder (which you do not have write access to unless you are an admin), Documents, Movies, Music, and Pictures. I'm a "power user" and I added a "dl" folder by DNDing it to the left. "dl" is where I download files from the web.

Even when I click on the internal system disk that is labeled "Macintosh HD" not "C:", it "lies" to me about what is there. It lists Applications, Developer, Documents, Library, System, and Users. It does not show things like /usr /sbin /opt/ /Volumes /cores, and other things that a normal user has no business even knowing about. Also as a normal user, even if they were to stumble across them, they would not have write access to them.

Now, compare this to what is given to a typical Windows or Linux user. Those systems proudly show you things that you have write access to and have no business even looking at them unless "you know what you are doing".

Now, is it "technically" more correct to do it the Windows or Linux way? Absolutely, its honest upfront, and the stuff there is important for the computer. But 99.9% of the stuff that is not important to 99.9% of the people that use computers. Its also a damn good thing to protect that data from corruption and being overwritten by filesystem permissions.

None of this is important.

Re:The following....

[Meski]

Nonsense. Everybody knows that ! is 'pling' and ? is 'query'.

You forgot the smiley there. I hope you forgot the smiley there, I should say.

Also, it's not forward-slash, it's just slash. There was never a need to indicate direction until backslash was invented, and seeing as backslash indicates that it is the opposite of a slash ... why the need for the excessive prefix?

If you a guiding a non-computer-literate one over the phone, save time in explanations and say forward-slash. You'll save time. I say double-click to my father, and every damned time he says left button or right button. Doesn't matter that I've repeatedly told him there is no right-double-click (/vent)

I do like slosh though ... I might adopt that one.

So do I. sloshed == drunk, slosh is the verb or something?

Re:The following....

[fishbot]

You forgot the smiley there. I hope you forgot the smiley there, I should say.

Yes, I forgot the smiley, although this is how they were referred to back when Acorn was king :-)

Re:The following....

[jp10558]

Nor can one usually take all the 'meat' chapters of various cookery books and bind them into a new book.

True, but your average windows filesystem doesn't do this either (it doesn't yet support virtual folders).

And I really think you're kind of stuck too - I.E. you're just missing part of the metaphor. You CAN take the third folder and place it in the second folder, but you can't take the second HD and place it in a folder of the first HD without shortcuts/mappings that aren't default, and can be eaisly avoided.

And a simple way to explain a shortcut is that it is like this sort of entry in a dictionary:

fool: see idiot

or what not. Just because the computer does the filpping for you ought't be too confusing, the computer does lots of stuff for you - that's the point.

And heirarchys can well be more than 3 deep in the real world. Think of the average university. You need to get blueprints of a building for a project.
1.First you know that you can find it in the University somewhere - this is like using the computer.
2.Then you know it's in the library system - this is opening windows explorer and looking in the
filesystem.
3.Then you know it's in the archetecture library - opening up the c drive vs cd rom or whatever
4.Then you look up in the card catalog and it's on the third floor - going to documents folder you created
5.Last room on the left - Opening up folder for recipies
6.Bookcase 2240 - dessert sub folder
7.find the book - find the file.

Eaisly 7 level's deep. You can't skip steps, if you do, you're in the wrong building or some other issue. Even our addresses are country,state,city,road,building,#.

Re:The following....

[chthonicdaemon]

You say:

Yes, good for them. These people are more interested in getting on with whatever their job actually is, then in 'exploring' their computers to find out where everything is. Stop trying to make everyone think like you, and instead focus your skills on making it easier for people to do what they do want to do.

I say: How about I do my thing and they do theirs and if they can't get their thing done it is not my job to do it for them? Why is it that it is always the technologically literate people who have to "focus your skills on making it easier for people to do what they do want to do". I am also a person and I also want to do what I want to do. Who's looking out for me?

Re:The following....

[insignis]

"Actually, it is not that the metaphor is broken per sé, it is that metaphores in become realities in computers."

To some extent this is desirable. The user needn't be concerned with the number of files stored as a result of what they see as a single document, the composition of those files (the actual file formats), and most times, not even the type. It is sufficient for them to know (1) the program they created it in, (2) where they saved it, and (3) what they named it. If they don't know 2 and/or 3, they can always hunt for it and try to recognize it, and failing that, try to search for it--but nothing beats some basic understanding of the difference between programs and files.

This distinction is not intuitive for a lot of users, who often lack a basic understanding of how computers work, and wouldn't expect (or possibly understood, if explained to them) operating systems, programs, documents, temporary files, web cache, cookies ... all to be stored in the same enormous tree.

Unempowered by such understanding, the users rely on crutches, like their documents usually just "being there" when they open the program, and anything outside the norm causes confusion. Lack of understanding can be fixed though, with proper training, which users rarely seek out, and computer experts rarely go out of their way to give when not absolutely required.

The ultimate problem here is the lack of willingness to learn. Why should they bother to learn, after all, when all they care about is the destination, not the ride? A computer is just a tool, and you (IT/MIS/help desk people) are just a mechanic. Most of the time they can get around fine, and that's sufficient, isn't it? I've seen the way clueless users solve problems on their own, and quite often, I wish they had come to me and asked a simple question: is this solution that I have come to a reasonable one for the problem at hand? I've also seen clueful users (who are in no way "computer people") reading documentation, experimenting, and learning how to use new software, correctly, with minimal to no hand-holding.

So is it the metaphor that's broken, or the users (who fail to see it as a metaphor at all, and take everything on their screen at face value)? Probably a combination.

As an aside, I see the "views" thing you mention as more of a failure of users. A lot of people have trouble with different representations of the same thing in a very general sense--once you start grouping and ordering differently (as in your photoalbum example), it's a different beast entirely to them. Which in a sense it is--the (underlying, raw) data is the same, but the (useful) information (from that data) is different. When they can see the raw data, they "get it"--i.e. throw it all in a listview and let them sort by whatever column they like. Once you start hiding/selectively showing data though, it becomes mysterious to them--but again, not insurmountably so if they're willing to seek and receive assistance.

obviously...

[one-eye-johnson]

Assembly.

Re:obviously...

[dinojemr]

If you just know assembly, you are not computer literate. You must be able to understand binary machine language to really understand what your computer is doing.

Re:obviously...

[Who235]

01011001 01100101 01110000 00101100 00100000 01110100 01101000 01100001 01110100 00100111
01110011 00100000 01110100 01101000 01100101 00100000 01101111 01101110 01101100 01111001
00100000 01100110 01110101 01100011 01101011 01101001 01101110 01100111 00100000 01110111
01100001 01111001 00101110 00100000 00101110 00100000 00101110

Re:obviously...

[fireman sam]

1001001 1110100 100000 1110011 1110101 1110010 1100101 100000 1101001 1110011

Re:obviously...

[thephotoman]

Win.

Re:obviously...

[Anonymous Coward]

s/Assembly/Perl/g

- Ben

Re:obviously...

[tonigonenstein]

Pfff, verilog of course

Re:obviously...

[EvanED]

You must be able to understand binary machine language...

Which, I must point out for the sake of those who don't know, you have to read off of an oscilloscope. None of that sissy hex dump stuff.

Re:obviously...

[jgc7]

I'm confused... It appears you are only using 7 bits. I can't register that. The parent says something along the lines of "Yep that's the only f'ing way"

Re:obviously...

[honkycat]

You're just confused because real men use even parity with 7 data bits. Extended ASCII is for chumps.

Re:obviously...

[leipzig3]

This reminds me of a post on bbspot. "Test Shows 99.99% of High School Seniors Can't Read Perl" http://www.bbspot.com/News/2001/03/perl_test.html

Re:obviously...

[random_amber]

This is a picture of my oscilliscope. I can read it very well, k, thanks ;-) http://nuith.com/hel3.jpg

Re:obviously...

[Mo6eB]

Almost correct. But, no, you have to understand machine language, not assembly, which still needs an assembler to be converted to machine language and then executed.

One is truly computer literate, only when he can write programs with a hex editor and use neither an interpreter, nor a compiler, nor an assembler.

Of course, this means that nobody is truly computer literate nowadays.

Re:obviously...

[Anonymous Coward]

Funny?! I think not. Parent should be modded informative!

Re:obviously...

[zobier]

Hex editor? Bah.

Simple

[Jimhotep]

Know more than the other people you work with.

Just stay one step ahead.

Re:Simple

[Elfboy]

That qualifies you as an admin in most places...

*shudder*

Re:Simple

[AuMatar]

Scarily enough, thats all too true. My mom, who can barely use email, is the hosptial's "computer person". She's the only one willing to pull the plug and reboot it when it freezes up.

Re:Simple

[TheWanderingHermit]

And that one step ahead means to know not to believe everything you read on /. before those you work with ever discover the site.

Re:Simple

[Rob_Warwick]

People in hospitals take pulling the plug far too seriously.

Re:Simple

[Anonymous Coward]

That's why computer people shouldn't work in the medical field. We keep pulling the plug whenever there is a problem and reboot.

One thing

[slashflood]

Unix

Power button

[Rendo]

I don't know, turning on the computer may seem difficult at first, but I'll be damned if any one I know can't do it!

I know I am a bit hardcore with this, but

[WatchTheTramCarPleas]

I think everyone should be able to put together a system from hardware and install an operating system. We all know it isn't particularly hard to do (I'm talking about a self installing os like windows or suse, not one of those uber hardcore linux distros), but you gain an entirely different perspective on computing when you understand the basic concepts required to do so. It will at least demystify the basic idea of computing for the vast majority of americans. I am thoughly dissapointed in the concept of computer literacy. Using ms word and pressing the start button does not qualify as being computer literate. You wouldn't exactly call a first grader who reads word by word one word a second literate and ready for the world would you?

Re:I know I am a bit hardcore with this, but

[detritus`]

But at the same time i can teach a monkey to fit the different shaped components together and put a disc in the drive. Seriously, i know people who've built computers that have no idea what the difference between PCI/AGP/PCI-X is and they'll blindly open attachments and download programs that offer great "weather forecasts". putting tab A into slot b is no big difference from double clicking an icon on the desktop. Explain it to them once or and most people can do it over and over without having any understanding. And installing an OS like XP does nothing to educate them. Once again its a simple matter of put disc in drive, press power, select yes a lot (Put in key, that part gets tricky) and then they have a full working machine. Unfortunately with the ease of new systems its hard to find a reason to learn the basics, like when i started with with my old Apple IIe and then later DOS machines. but then again most people dont need to know this anymore, as everything is so automated nowadays. Basic skills such as what is a program, what is an OS, etc would be the most important things i would teach a complete newbie. That and common file extensions and turn off "hide file extensions" seriously that has to be one of the biggest security issues in XP in my mind. paris hilton nude.jpg.exe is probably one of the more sucessful viruses out there

Re:I know I am a bit hardcore with this, but

[slasher999]

There was a time when I would have agreed completely. That time was probably around '95 or so. However, I've modified that idea somewhat over the past decade. Today I think everyone who wants to consider themselves "computer literate" should be able to identify the components of a typical computer - that is a PC or Mac, laptop or desktop (the parts aren't that different after all). Can they tell the difference between a hard drive and a video card? Can they explain the basic purpose of each?

Onto the operating system. A person who considers themselves "computer literate" should be able to describe the basic purpose of an operating system and use the OS they are most familiar with in an efficient manner. The person should also be able to maintain the system - install and update AV or Malware protection and describe the purpose of each, apply service packs to the OS and installed applications and describe their purpose, upgrade shrinkwrapped applications (or applications that are comparable to that now antiquated term, I'm simply not including the ability to download source and config/make/make install here).

I believe those are the basic qualifications for today's computer literate person.

Re:I know I am a bit hardcore with this, but

[alfs boner]

You're never going to get laid, Pat.

Re:I know I am a bit hardcore with this, but

[iggy_mon]

you've just described the A+ program.

http://www.comptia.org/certification/a/

Re:I know I am a bit hardcore with this, but

[An Onerous Coward]

Back up a bit. I don't think putting together a computer is either strictly necessary or strictly helpful. Once the person has put it together, and installed the OS, they've got this screen staring at them, asking them what they want to do. And they'll have no idea.

I can suggest several branches of computer literacy:

1): the ability to interact with common GUIs. Know what a mouse is, be able to click it and make things happen. As a bonus, add right-click (or whatever the hell you Mac people do). Learn to read dialog boxes and respond to them.

2): Learn to open common applications, and interact with common applications such as a web browser and a word processor. Know what a file is and how to save one. Know what the directory structure is and at least one way to navigate it.

3): Absolute basic hardware! Be able to take your computer apart, move it to a different room, stick all the things in the back in, and have it work as it did before. Knowing the various jacks by sight might get bonus points, but isn't strictly necessary.

4): Regular maintenance. Know what a virus is, and why you have to keep your virus definitions up to date. Know what a patch is, and why you're supposed to install one.

5): More theory. Learn basic technical concepts, like what an operating system is, what an application is, the difference between memory, hard drive, processor, networking.

6): Internet basics. Understand that when your computer loads up a web page, it's actually talking to another computer. Understand the concept of "bandwidth" (using a hose analogy if needed). Understand the difference between the Web and the Internet. Know that computers identify each other by numbers known as "addresses", and that the domain names are simply a way of mapping from memorable names to those numbers.

7): Security. Know what a firewall is and what it does. Understand why you don't run attachments sent by random people. Have some idea of what constitutes a good password.

I think if you know all this, it would be a rather stingy society that wouldn't call you "computer literate". Your approach would probably go a long way towards getting some of the concepts down, but it's only a starting point.

Re:I know I am a bit hardcore with this, but

[Kbo1982]

I have been teaching P.C. Literacy for a year now, and I'd be the first to admit that there are a lot of things that need to be changed (#1 being that P.C.!=Microsoft, therefore P.C. Literacy!=Microsoft Literacy)

The thing about P.C. Literacy classes is that they should be useful. While you might find your ability to put together a system to be useful, the average student (and maybe this is colored in my mind by the fact I teach at a community college) would not take the time and energy to build one even if they new how. If they are going to get a job that needs that skill, they will take an entire class on it.

I don't on the other hand think that 1 class dedicated to software installation would be a bad idea. It's not supposed to be an official part of the semester where I teach (to maintain transferability to the university, we have to follow a schedule set out for us without much freedom) but I usually end up having to go through how to install the testing software we use.

Basically, there are tons of things that we would love to teach everyone, but we have 4 1/2 months, meeting 2 days a we. When we start out with students who don't know how to double click, it is sometimes all we can do to get through cut and paste and how to save a file where you will actually be able to find it next time you need it. Sad but true.

Re:I know I am a bit hardcore with this, but

[0racle]

Using ms word and pressing the start button does not qualify as being computer literate

Neither does plugging things into the only slot they fit in or following prompts on a screen. Building a PC and installing an OS teaches you nothing. A PC when from a magical white box to a box made up of magical components but you still have no idea what they do. Installing Windows is the same prompt following that comprises installing any other piece of software, so you have still learnt nothing. Going through a procedure and ending up with having a much clue as you started with does not 'demystify the basic idea of computing for the vast majority of americans.'

Re:I know I am a bit hardcore with this, but

[WatchTheTramCarPleas]

You are right, I thought it was implied that you would also be taught what you wree doing and what it meant as you went along, but I gues I shouldn't assume.

Re:I know I am a bit hardcore with this, but

[wordsofwisedumb]

Within computer literacy there are several subcategories.

There is security literacy which at the very least means they know not to click on every popup, but should also mean knowing how to correctly use a firewall like zone alarm on a windows computer. They should also understand what programs need what kinds of access on a non windows computer (this means not giving a root password every time you are prompted).

There is the issue of multiple OSes, a user should recognize that windows xp is not the only OS available and there are alternatives. They should know some basic information about using major OSes before they are considered computer literate.

Identification of hardware pieces is also important, not just the external parts. A person should know a motherboard, what a processor looks like, heat syncs, fans, hard drives, dvd drives, they should recognize all these parts and possibly video cards, and sound cards. They should be able to plug everything in correctly on the outside of the computer.

Basic internet skills starting at a browser. I have to constantly teach my parents that you dont have to doubleclick a link. They need to know the basic media filetypes they will encounter online (.swf, html, video formats etc.) Email is also a basic skill needed, understanding the cc, bcc, to, from, subject fields as well as attachments.

They need to understand the file system. They should be able to navigate to a file using the operating systems file manager. Many people don't realize that the document they created in microsoft word does not exist only in microsoft word, it is a file that is accessible through other programs.

Too much beyond this and you get into literacy in individual programs which varies depending on your concentration. I am an architect and need to know how to use various cad programs and 3d modelers as well as layout tools and even video editing software. None of these are relevant to many users and don't qualify as requirements for computer literacy.

Microsoft office is NOT a requirement for computer literacy, it IS a requirement for most office jobs.

Re:I know I am a bit hardcore with this, but

[Jimithing DMB]

as a bonus, add right-click (or whatever the hell you Mac people do).

We Mac people have a menu-bar at the very top of the screen outside of all other windows. It is contextually sensitive. That is, when you are in Safari (web browser) you have File, Edit, View, History, Bookmarks, Window, Help. But in Mail you have File, Edit, View, Mailbox, Message, Format, Window.

Furthermore, if the focus is in a text entry box (as indicated by the blue focus ring) the choices in the edit menu like cut/copy/paste all light up. Or if you're in Mail and have a message header (in the list) selected the choices in the Message menu light up and the choices in the Edit menu do things like cut/copy/paste the entire message itself.

It pretty much removes the need to use contextual menus at all at the expense of having to move to the top of the screen. Of course, OS X (the only version of Mac I've ever used) does have contextual menus so you can avoid having to bang the mouse to the top of the screen to do something. However, the contextual menus tend to be pared down and only offer the most common options. For less regular tasks one can use the menubar as has always been available in Mac OS.

This menubar behavior is rather odd if you're used to menubars inside of windows and also rather odd when you realize it's contextual and not just a static bunch of choices. Once you get used to it though you tend to wonder why other systems don't implement it.

While on the subject, NeXT had an even more interesting menu system. It was Mac-like in that the menubar was contextual except that it wasn't a menubar at the top of the screen nor was it visible in a window. Instead you simply clicked the mouse button (NeXT was by default a 1-button system) in the empty space on the desktop and the current application's contextually sensitive menu would appear. This worked because the desktop wasn't a desktop in the sense of Mac OS or Windows but instead just displayed the background.

I do believe Apple has gotten it right with OS X. Right-click (or hold control while clicking) to get a contextual menu if you're a power user. If you're just learning you don't even need to know about mouse buttons, you just plunk the whole thing down. Everything you could possibly want to do is in the menubar. Furthermore, if you're really a power user you can memorize the key combinations because nearly everything has one and the common ones are standard across all apps.

Forcing users to learn to right-click in order to use an app is poor design.

Re:I know I am a bit hardcore with this, but

[urbanRealist]

I would go even further. I think you must be able to substitute vi for nano at every text-editing step of a gentoo installation.

Just kidding! I do think that avoiding the need for installing and updating "AV or Malware protection" should be sufficent.

Re:I know I am a bit hardcore with this, but

[aibrahim]

As a bonus, add right-click (or whatever the hell you Mac people do).

Uh... right click ? Cause you know we have mice with more than one button and such. Default on newer desktop Macs.

In the event of a single button mouse, control-click emulates a right click.

Of course, someone pointed out at length that OS X is designed so that you don't need more than one mouse button- but some apps require it.

Re:I know I am a bit hardcore with this, but

[sfe_software]

I can suggest several branches of computer literacy:

1): the ability to interact with common GUIs. Know what a mouse is, be able to click it and make things happen. As a bonus, add right-click (or whatever the hell you Mac people do). Learn to read dialog boxes and respond to them.

On this one, I agree. Regardless of the system in use, basic I/O (keyboard, mouse, screen) knowledge should be required.

3): Absolute basic hardware! Be able to take your computer apart, move it to a different room, stick all the things in the back in, and have it work as it did before. Knowing the various jacks by sight might get bonus points, but isn't strictly necessary.

I agree on this point to an extent. Moving the machine to another room should be considered basic knowledge. Changing hardware internally should not. A few years ago I might have thought so, but these days, the tower is (considered by most) a device you don't open, like your VCR, DVD etc... hell, these days I hesitate to advise people to keep their PC plugged in (for grounding purposes) since many systems no longer have a hard-wired "off" switch...

4): Regular maintenance. Know what a virus is, and why you have to keep your virus definitions up to date. Know what a patch is, and why you're supposed to install one.

Unfortunately this is the case these days. Viruses used to be somehthing you got when you did something stupid (say, loading a program from a friend's diskette, or downloading a program from an unknown source). Now days, they are almost an inevitability...

5): More theory. Learn basic technical concepts, like what an operating system is, what an application is, the difference between memory, hard drive, processor, networking.

I want to agree with this point. But it's difficult when I go to my aunt's house, and she refers to the tower as the "modem" or the "hard drive". She has no understanding of what makes up the computer at all...

I've tried to explain my Linux box to people I would even consider "computer literate", only to be met with blank stares... to many, a computer runs Windows, period. The idea that there might be something else just confuses them...

6): Internet basics...

This proves to be very difficult in some cases. I've tried to turn friends/family on to Firefox, without success. Most users don't understand that the Browser is no more than an application (Microsoft made sure of this). They usually see the "blue 'E'" as "The Internet".

7): Security. Know what a firewall is and what it does. Understand why you don't run attachments sent by random people. Have some idea of what constitutes a good password.

Most of my friends/family use a hardware firewall (eg, a Linksys router or similar). In a way it's a good thing, in that they don't have to know/care what it is, what it does, why it's necessary...

But trying to explain it's purpose is usually futile. Attachments? My Dad doesn't understand when I explain why an .EXE is bad, but a .JPG is ok, and so on. Luckily he uses (ugh!) Outlook, which (newer versions) by default block dangerous extensions... and he doesn't have to care why.

Bottom line:
The term Computer Literate depends on context. If you're hiring someome to write C++ code using .Net and the Win32 API, your definition will be different from someone looking for one to write press releases in MS Word, with the occasional quarterly profit forecast chart in Excel... or if you're looking for someone to answer sales emails using a web-based system...

In other words, there is no single definitive definition of computer literate that I am aware of.

Re:I know I am a bit hardcore with this, but

[constantnormal]

BRAVO!

This is the only post I have seen (I filter so as not to have to hold my nose too much) that deigns to hint that a computer user ought not to be considered "computer literate" if they know nothing about the difference between volatile memory (RAM) and non-volatile memory (disk). Indeed, it would seem that many Slashdotters are unaware that there are different forms of memory.

The only notion I would add to your list is the recognition that information within a computer is made up of bits, and interpretations of various groupings of bits into different things (characters, numbers, assorted program codes) is why we call it "code". A user need not be able to translate between these interpretations of the bits, but knowing they are present is mandatory if one is to be considered "literate" in this area.

Re:I know I am a bit hardcore with this, but

[Anonymous Coward]

As a high school computer teacher of more than 20 years, I can tell you that computer illiteracy is rampant and increasing in education. Having used and administered rooms and schools full of Commodore Pets, c64's, IBM token link networks, Amigas, Mac labs of various flavours, DOS 1.0 and up, Windows 3.1, 95, 98, ME, 2000, NT, and currently a 20 station lab of Mandriva computers, the linux lab has been heaven. However, the entire school board other than me has "standardized" on about 50,000 M$ win2000 boxes. It's a nightmare for them, but they believe that they are somehow "computer literate", because they can use IE with their flash-ridden, graphic overloaded webpages and M$ Word to make nice-looking, important-sounding documents.

An example? Recently, I was discussing producing podcasts and making mp3 files for distribution with a student. A teacher overheard and asked, "what's an mp3 file?". The student was awestruck that a teacher, surrounded by kids wearing Ipods didn't know what an mp3 file was. But the school board thinks this staff member is "computer literate". Another example? The guy who supposedly looks after all of the computers in the school (about 8 M$ win labs, other than the linux lab, which he knows absolutely nothing about), came to me recently to ask: "What is an iso file?"...

Welcome to "computer literacy", according to school board officials in Toronto, Canada...sigh...

Re:I know I am a bit hardcore with this, but

[hackstraw]

I think everyone should be able to put together a system from hardware and install an operating system.

Bullshit.

Everyone should not be able to put together a house or car or a medical practice, why a computer?

I'm a sysadmin, and I'm pretty damn good, and I don't know how to put together a system from hardware and install an operating system on my SMC wireless router without prior research. Why should any person have to do such a thing for a computer?

Almost nobody puts together phone networks, VCRs, DVD players, TVs, DVRs, answering machines, or any of that.

Its complete vanity to expect everybody to do such a thing.

Computer Literate

[L33THa0R69]

The early 90's called, they want their term back.

Re:Computer Literate

[Anonymous Coward]

The early 90's called, they want their term back.

Hey, the early 90's called, they want their form-letter joke back.

  Oh GOD! The joke's FOLDING IN UPON ITSELF! RUN WHILE YOU STILL CAN!

ctrl+alt+delete

[Anonymous Coward]

see subject line

Interaction, information organisation, networking

[Bogtha]

• Basic interaction with a computer - to the point where they know the difference between backspace and delete and the difference between left-click and right-click, not to the point where they know particular key combos.
• Basic peripheral use - so that they know what printers and scanners are, that they need to switch the monitor on separately, etc.
• Basic interaction with a GUI - so that they know what windows are, what minimisation/maximisation does, what programs are, how to navigate between common window types.
• Basic file management - what loading and saving means, how to organise files into directories, the difference between CDs and the hard drive, etc.
• Surfing and email - these are the two killer apps for most people, and they aren't very intuitive if all you know about the Internet is how to spell it. Furthermore, teaching somebody to use the web enables them to do quite a bit, as many applications are simply being created as web applications these days.

The basic rule of thumb I would use is that if you've taught them with one operating system, and they don't have any difficulty accomplishing the same tasks with another operating system of the same basic design, then they've learnt the basic concepts well enough as opposed to learning by rote what to click.

Not much, only...

[lavaamp]

Assembly

Re:Not much, only...

[Stevyn]

I honestly agree. I found it pretty cool when I learned all a computer can really do is perform some simple arithmatic and logical operations on numbers and make conditional branches. Everything else is hardware abstraction or insanely complex software systems when compared to these simple operations.

The whole computer literacy is really about understanding how to interact with what someone else designed. Even programming takes this course when you use text editors, libraries, and compilers. So computer literacy can be as simple as using windows and word. It can expand almost infinitely into designing operating systems and hardware. The only thing that I hate is when people get the idea that's it's somehow magic or not based on logic.

Re:Not much, only...

[wiz31337]

If you can successfully find your way to porn while at work behind a content filter, then you're probably computer literate. If not it is a really good skill to have.

Re:Not much, only...

[Anonymous Coward]

Damnit, I'm the one installing the content filter!

Quit looking at porn! I see you!

Re:Not much, only...

[Anonymous Coward]

I found it pretty cool when I learned all a computer can really do is perform some simple arithmatic and logical operations on numbers and make conditional branches. Everything else is hardware abstraction or insanely complex software systems when compared to these simple operations.

Most average people don't see things this way. When you know this, you can realize that computers are nothing more than tools. These days, they are tools with many layers of abstraction, to the point that they seem like magic, but in the end a computer is just a device that follows a specific set of rules it was programmed to follow.

Today's systems are complex to the point that it's difficult to differentiate between hardware, software, and firmware... but the same rules apply. However, most computer users aren't familiar with the differences, and most don't care.

They're missing the point.

[Chowderbags]

It shouldn't be about being able to use certain products or being able to do a specific task, the real goal should be teaching the kids to find out how to do things for themselves.

Give a man a fish, feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, feed him for a lifetime. Teach a man to learn things for himself, and he'll be a hell of a lot more than a fisherman.

Re:They're missing the point.

[Zardus]

Although you could also say: Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, and you lose your monopoly. Maybe its for the better for us techies if the masses aren't "Computer Literate"?

I don't really think that. Having people know at least the 'basics' would make life a whole lot easier for a whole lot of people, but it would also put a few computer security personell out of jobs.

Re:They're missing the point.

[Lendrick]

...set him on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. :)

Honestly, I'd be happy if people just knew the difference between memory and hard drive space. It doesn't help nowadays that small USB drives and the like are called "memory sticks".

Back in the days of DOS, I had a friend who couldn't run a game because he didn't have enough free memory. So he went and deleted a lot of stuff off his hard drive, and managed to delete something that loaded at boot. Lo and behold, his game worked after that, thereby reinforcing his idea that memory and hard drive space are the same thing. I never could convince him otherwise after that. :)

Re:They're missing the point.

[thephotoman]

Hopefully, this would mean going further than saying, "Google, motherfucker! Can you use it?"

I've seen many cases where that was the answer given to questions asked about how one could learn more about a computer subject. Of course, I'm paraphrasing the Samuel L. "Snakes on a Plane" Jackson book on computer literacy, but the actual responses are, in many cases, not that far from the quote. Perhaps if those of us who actually know what we're talking about would be a little more patient with people, they might be slightly more willing to pay attention to us.

Re:They're missing the point.

[CyanDisaster]

...set him on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life...

...and for a brief period afterwards.

Hope be with ye,
Cyan

Re:They're missing the point.

[Lars83]

Figure out a way to motivate today's kids to learn...and you'll be a famous millionaire.

Re:They're missing the point.

[AnalystX]

Here, here! I wish there was a way to beat curiosity into people.

Re:They're missing the point.

[mikeage]

Give a man a fish, feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, feed him for a lifetime.

Give a man fire, keep him warm for a day. Set a man on fire, keep him warm for the rest of his life.

Re:They're missing the point.

[Jacer]

I like proverbs too!! Build a man a fire, keep him warm for a night. Set a man on fire, keep him warm for the rest of his life.

Re:They're missing the point.

[blackbeaktux]

Teach a man to be curious, and you'll be learning from him one day.

It's sad that we're often satisfied with step #2 and steps 3 and 4 are viewed in disdain.

The Key Skill Is Ability to Learn

[celest]

With the ever-changing technologies, the key skill no longer becomes knowing how to use any particular tool, piece of hardware or software, but rather becomes the ability to adapt and effectively learn how to use any tool or environment.

Not to sound too cliché, but Google and the Internet are at the center of this. Much like books eliminated the need for memorization and transmission by oral tradition, Google and the Internet revolutionize how one learns and adapts. Teach your students how to learn and adapt. Teach them skills on ways to search for information, ways to evaluate what information is good, and what is trash, and teach them how to contribute back information for others to learn from their experiences, good or bad.

To evaluate them, give them novel, creative problems and the tools to learn how to adapt to the environment, and search for solutions. Evaluate their ability to use the resources at their disposal to come up with their own solutions to the problems. This is infinitely better than training them to rote memorize solutions to static problems.

I'd like to see a day where a skill that is searched for on a resumé is no longer a specific ability with a specific tool, but simply the line "Fast and adaptive learner" or "Excel at creative solution design in novel environments." That's what I'd be looking for in an employee, and for future generations of technology users.

Re:The Key Skill Is Ability to Learn

[flandery]

I'd like to see a day where a skill that is searched for on a resumé is no longer a specific ability with a specific tool, but simply the line "Fast and adaptive learner" or "Excel at creative solution design in novel environments." That's what I'd be looking for in an employee, and for future generations of technology users.

Unfortunately that isn't what an employer will see when they see "Fast and adaptive learner". Instead, they'll adopt the more typical manager-think "He doesn't know tool XYZ! That will only increase his cost of training."

I do long for the same day as you, but for that to happen mindsets must be changed.

Re:The Key Skill Is Ability to Learn

[Netochka]

I definitely agree with the parent poster. In this vein, and since generally kids are becoming more and more computer literate I'd say that a better way to teach would be to actually make them use software that they're not used to. i.e. Put them on a nice linux distribution with OpenOffice or something like that, as too often people are just put off because of the fact that something is different than they're used to. In addition, this would put all the kids on a bit more of an equal playing field, and then as for the actual learning part the parent poster had it right, that they should actually have to figure out stuff for themselves, and learn how to find the information that they need.

About the last point though:
I'd like to see a day where a skill that is searched for on a resumé is no longer a specific ability with a specific tool, but simply the line "Fast and adaptive learner" or "Excel at creative solution design in novel environments." That's what I'd be looking for in an employee, and for future generations of technology users.

I'm pretty sure everyone does that already. The problem is that anyone can write it, and it's not exactly something you can test very well in a 30 minute interview.

Re:The Key Skill Is Ability to Learn

[gbobeck]

With the ever-changing technologies, the key skill no longer becomes knowing how to use any particular tool, piece of hardware or software, but rather becomes the ability to adapt and effectively learn how to use any tool or environment... ...To evaluate them, give them novel, creative problems and the tools to learn how to adapt to the environment, and search for solutions. Evaluate their ability to use the resources at their disposal to come up with their own solutions to the problems.

I agree.

Of course, once any user knows how to search and learn as they go, the next most important skill that must be sharpened is the ability to filter fact from crap.

Generally

[Anonymous Coward]

Computer Literate in my mind is: 1. Basic knowledge of the operating system your using: How to change your desktop background, how to shut down the machine properly, how to install programs, how to force quit something. 2. Being able to access the internet from your machine and find a web address. 3. Being able to use an email program or web based email. 4. Being able to use Word.

Best practices!

[zanglang]

Other than the normal Microsoft programs, a list of best practices would almost certainly be useful, i.e:

How to work on the system safely (think before opening email attachments)

How to browse safely (know how to spot phishing sites, avoid providing sensitive data, install a proper browser like Firefox)

How to take care of your operating system (defrag regularly, delete unwanted files), and

Basic security (be careful with passwords, instead of sticking them on the monitor)

Re:Best practices!

[Anonymous Coward]

Use a decent filesystem so they don't need to defrag, etc.

As an educational goal

[Beryllium Sphere(tm)]

A literate person is one who can learn anything given time and opportunity, not someone who's read everything.

A computer literate person should be one who grasps a foundation of knowledge that prevents dead ends and allows learning whatever the current task requires.

The key concept would have to be that a computer is a playback device for software, that whoever controls the software owns the computer (yes, owns. Which gives you more control, being handed car keys, or being handed a root password?), and that some software is much better than other software. Teach that and you've cured all the people who think Internet Explorer is "the internet".

If you want to teach people to use a computer to commmunicate better, then teach them to communicate better. Outlining is a skill that is even more useful for web pages than it was for text. Good composition skills are indispensable. Old-fashioned "rhetoric" classes have a lot to offer about conveying and supporting ideas. Where text is considered obsolete, teach the "grammar" and "vocabulary" that filmmakers have worked out for multimedia works.

Re:As an educational goal

[dalroth5]

"Which gives you more control, being handed car keys, or being handed a root password?"

If I want to get to Taco Bell, give me the car keys every time. Mind you, they don't have root passwords there; but there again they do have root beer and I quite like that stuff.

Re:As an educational goal

[pedalman]

If you want to teach people to use a computer to commmunicate better, then teach them to communicate better. Outlining is a skill that is even more useful for web pages than it was for text. Good composition skills are indispensable. Old-fashioned "rhetoric" classes have a lot to offer about conveying and supporting ideas. Where text is considered obsolete, teach the "grammar" and "vocabulary" that filmmakers have worked out for multimedia works.

Sounds like part of the basic core curriculum (math, English, arts, etc.) required of any college or university. Hmmmm...learning how to think.....fascinating concept.

The one true test

[inu_maru]

Is to know at least one way to make clippy go. OS wipe out is my favorite.

Have a basic knowledge

[martonlorand]

Know what is acomputer, how it works on a basic level, CPU, Memory, Harddrive, Video/Monitor. A computer literate person should know how theese work together under the command of an OS, have a basic idea about what an operating system is and what is the different betwean an OS and an Application

IMHO if one knows these will be able to use basic applications (including MS Office if that is what he/she desires) and call him/herself computer literate.

Understanding that a car has engine, wheel, steering wheel, transmission is necessary to drive a car. Knowing the same basic things about a computer is the same.

Than if they are programmers, network admins, webmasters - they are not computer literate's any more. They are specialized pretty much like car mechanics...

An executive, administrative person etc. is computer literate if he/she knows this - otherwise they are trained monkeys^H^H^H^H^H^H^H users, and are afraid to do anything that wasn't in the training - in consequence they will be unable to use other programs that they are trained in.

Installing.

[Anonymous Coward]

How to install an operating system, so that when they get sick of non-free rubbish they can switch to a free software system.... Or reinstall Windows themselves.

Re:Installing.

[Anonymous Coward]

Agreed!

The Terms

[DivineOmega]

Computer literacy as a term in itself is ridiculous. Your washing machine has a computer in it. Does that mean if you can set a spin cycle correctly you are somewhat 'computer literate'?

Re:The Terms

[Virak]

In general, if people talk about 'computers', without content they mean PCs. And I'd hope your washing machine doesn't run any Microsoft products.

Re:The Terms

[Virak]

Err, without context. Oops.

Re:The Terms

[DivineOmega]

You mean you haven't heard of Microsoft Cleaner?

It's currently only compatible Microsoft Windows Washing Edition.

Re:The Terms

[Ian Action]

If you refer to your washing machine as a computer, yes, feel free to call yourself computer literate.

a programming language

[astrashe]

No one agrees with me on this, but I think that you have to know a computer language to understand computers. It can even be something like LOGO, for kids. I'm not suggesting that someone has to know a set of GUI widgets for a modern desktop or anything.

If you know a language, you know what an algorithm is, even if you don't know the word. And if you know what an algorithm is, you pretty much know what a computer is.

I'm a giant fan of that MIT vision -- LOGO for kids, extensible and scriptable apps for adults, cheap laptops for people in parts of the world where money is scarce, open information on the web, etc.

I don't have kids, though, and I've never convinced anyone that their kids would be better of learning LOGO than powerpoint. Everyone says the same thing -- you don't have to be an engineer to drive a car.

I was lucky -- I got to learn about computers with a KIM-1 single board machine, and timesharing on a PDP-10, reading books about games written by hippies. If I wanted to play a game, I'd usually have to port it from one dialect of BASIC to another. It wasn't really hard, and it's not really fair to call them ports. But you had to understand the code at least a little bit.

I think it would be a lot harder to learn from iTunes.

Re:a programming language

[Sam Nitzberg]

I pretty much agree with this post.

I'd rather someone learn the history of computing - from counting knots on ropes to the history of geometry and basic measuring devices, through to the modern era and techniques.

Learn math properly, with history, and you can develop a great sense of how things can and should work - this can be a great foundation.

Beyond this, I don't think that learning any one technology or processor - based system is vital. What is key is being given an environment - an assembly language, a LOGO, BASIC, C, JAVA, etc..., and being able to play and experiment.

Re:a programming language

[bloosh]

I currently teach Logo to 80 something 7th graders a week using UCBLogo on Linux (LTSP).

I start them off with basic turtle graphics and gradually introduce concepts such as variables, loops, etc. There are five or six kids in each class that ask me how to do the same stuff at home.

Re:a programming language

[MrNougat]

... I think that you have to know a computer language to understand computers.

Hurrah. I learned BASIC when I was 13, and got pretty good at it. Sadly, my family didn't have the money at the time to be able to afford anything computerwise after the Timex/Sinclairs and C64s all went by the wayside. At the same time, I was playing video games at the arcade. Because I knew a programming language, I understood that the computer in the video game was following a set of commands, and could imagine all the lines of BASIC that would accomplish the same thing. ... you don't have to be an engineer to drive a car.

You don't have to be an engineer, but it doesn't hurt knowing how the thing works. I've always insisted that the best way to teach someone how to drive a manual transmission is to start by describing how a clutch works. That clutch pedal - it's connected to something, you know? And when you press it down, something happens. And when you let it up, something else happens.

When you press buttons on your computer keyboard, those inputs are read by programming - and something happens. It's not just magic. Too many people, having absolutely no clue how anything works, just think everything runs on magic.

Re:a programming language

[QuantumG]

Why not teach em FORTRAN too?

Have a . Teach em something that is actually useful.

Re:a programming language

[vga_init]

Sure, I agree with you.

When most people say computer literacy, they often aren't talking about what you're describing; most will not approach programming because they may either think that it is too difficult, or they lack the motivation to do it because they don't understand or want the benefits. In most scenarios, literacy is taken to mean "make it work," or, more importantly, "don't come to us for help."

Understanding computers, however, goes a bit far beyond just that. Learning a programming language is an endeavor that gives people a much more realistic perspective on what computers are and how they work. It may help them to appreciate software, and offer insight into exactly why it works the way it works.

I think that without sufficient programming experience, no person can ever claim to have more than a basic understanding of computers.

Re:a programming language

[Geckoman]

Everyone says the same thing -- you don't have to be an engineer to drive a car.

That's an imprecise analogy. You don't have to be an electrical engineer to program a computer any more than you have to be a mechanical engineer to drive a car.

People who know how to use a computer, but who have no concept of programming, are more like people who know how to ride public transportation, but who can't actually drive themselves.

You can get along fine with public transportation, but you'll be mostly confined to those places that have routes running to them. That's also much easier to live with if you live in a large, densely populated city rather than out on the frontier. Maybe that's why Windows is more popular than Linux: it's easier to get around in it without really learning how to drive.

In the end, I guess rudimentary programming skills aren't essential for computer literacy, but they should be considered essential for computer liberty, since without the ability to make the computer do your will, you will always be confined to the position of waiting around for declarations from on high of what you're allowed and able to do.

You'll be the 21st century equivalent of the medieval church laity, forever dependent on the literate clergy to relay the scripture to you.

Re:a programming language

[Anonymous Coward]

Unfortunately, magic is getting expensive. I went to a magic station the other day, and it was $5 a gallon. I think I might have to convert my car to natural magic sooner or later.

Re:a programming language

[crhylove]

Poof! Here's a whole society of people who believe in magic!

Look, I don't play rock paper scissors with people who think "sucker punch to the throat" is a fair move, and still most of the people I deal with don't ACTUALLY believe in magic, ALL THE WAY.

rhY

Qualifies as "Literacy" IMHO...

[abscissa]

Some posts have suggested Unix and assembly (as a joke?), which is like suggesting you can't read unless you can read hyroglyphics. Not that it's not important or that Unix is bad, it just is irrelevant to "basic literacy" IMHO. So, here is my list:

1. How to set up and troubleshoot basic Windows XP issues
2. How to add or remove components (AGP card, PCI cards, etc.)
3. What ethernet is, what USB is, what bluetooth is, etc.
4. The basics of Microsoft Word + Excel (create new document, save, print, etc.)
5. Internet searching
6. How to manipulate files (move between folders, delete, etc.)

That's right -- I didn't mention OS X or any other operating system. Even though I use a Macbook Pro myself I would still say that Windows is more important to "literacy". Also, I would venture to say that most people who are adept at Windows could learn OS X extremely quickly. (Except my grandfather, who decries the fact there is no "maximise" button for the web browser to make his stock charts big.)

Re:Qualifies as "Literacy" IMHO...

[Anonymous Coward]

Apparently I am computer illiterate. Despite a Master's degree in CS and a software engineering job, I can't even name any basic Windows XP issues, much less set up or troubleshoot them. Sometimes I can muddle through, but I make it a point to avoid Windows as much as possible and I frequently just give up on the rare occasion that somebody corners me and forces me to try to fix their computer.

Re:Qualifies as "Literacy" IMHO...

[Anonymous Coward]

That's true. You probably aren't qualified for an entry level computing job, such as helpdesk or phone support.

Re:Qualifies as "Literacy" IMHO...

[vitamine73]

I think you forgot some basics. To take up a car analogy popular in this thread, most people know the basic parts that make a car a car: an engine, a steering wheel, tires, brakes. I think computer literacy should start there also, what are the different (basic) parts that make up a computer, what do they do: CPU, RAM, ROM, storage, input devices...

Re:Qualifies as "Literacy" IMHO...

[a gash]

If you don't call them 'powerbooks' you're part of the problem! ;)

Re:Qualifies as "Literacy" IMHO...

[anagama]

Re: opinion in favor of windowsXP-centric knowledge

I don't think it matters what GUI based system a person learns. I hired someone fresh out of community college as an assistant recently. I think I spent 10 or 15 minutes showing her Openoffice, Nautilus, and Evolution. She's using all the stuff I need her to use just fine despite probably having never even heard the word "linux" before. The reason for this is that there is some level of consistency between all GUI apps.

As an employer, I don't really care if the person got their GUI experience on Windows, *nix, OSX, or something way out in left field. As long as the person can apply concepts to the program, they'll be fine. By concepts I mean things like this: you know you want to change a default setting so you will look for the option in places like "settings" or "options" or "preferences" or whatever semi-synonymous word the developer chose to use. Learn to apply concepts rather than steps, and it doesn't matter where you picked up your knowledge.

Basic vs Advanced.

[Necoras]

Basic knowledge would probably be the ability to surf the internet w/o difficulty, use a basic editor/wordprocessor, read and send e-mail, and possibly run a few choice applications. Advanced users should have an understanding of how to install/uninstall software and operating systems, navigate a command prompt/shell, and know the basics of how an operating system works. Ideally they should be able to write scripts and probably some code. They should be able to learn new operating systems and applications quickly. The biggest factor in literacy is comfort. If you can read/write/speak a language without difficulty then you're literate. If you can get things done on a computer easily then you're computer literate.

context: education

[cbr2702]

Someone says "our schools should make sure all their graduates are computer literate". People agree. What does this sort of literacy entail?

Re:context: education

[AKAImBatman]

What does this sort of literacy entail?

I guess it means we need [Computer] Shop Class? Or do we need [Computer] Driver's Ed? Or we could just stick with the wonderful car analogy (don't you just loooooove car analogies?) and have both!

Surprisingly, that may actually make sense.

Re:context: education

[mysticgoat]

I work for the department of a community college that teaches computer skills to adults who are seeking entry level jobs. Our clientelle are generally funded by one of half a dozen different State grants. We've got a proven track record of taking persons off State assistance programs and turning them into taxpayers.

In this milieu, I think "computer literacy" can be regarded as a continuum with definite upper and lower boundaries:

• The low boundary is being able to perform common office tasks like email, word processing, and internet searches, and being able to understand and follow general instructions with regard to executing these tasks, and being able to describe specific tasks in these categories in an understandable way. A person who can do these things is going to be an asset to any company who hires them and we teach to this level of performance.
• The lower middle part concerns being able to do all of the common office tasks with one brand of software, and being able to confidently learn how to do these tasks on unfamiliar software, and demonstrating a history of on-going acquisition of computer skills. I try to influence our courses so they foster the attitudes, curiosity, and ambition that would cause our students to seek this level of proficiency after they are employed.
• The upper middle part concerns being able to contribute meaningfully to risk/benefit discussions about changing office software, policies, or procedures. This kind of work is to common office work as writing novels or poetry is to writing one's diary: it involves much more than technical proficiency with the software tools; it requires a degree of insight into the social and political aspects of software usage.
• And the high boundary of computer literacy in this milieu is being able to develop and implement office policies and procedures that effectively exploit available software and computer resources. Certainly there are many technical skills like programming or database construction that might feed into this, but those skills are also clearly separate from shaping software tasks and job descriptions in useful ways. (This may sound like systems analyst work-- but in practice it is more like a merger of choreography and marriage counseling).

Note that it is entirely possible for someone with extensive programming or sysadmin skills to score pretty low on this continuum. I have met such people. It almost seems as though some people can learn to shoe a horse without ever learning the basics about how to ride one.

Re:context: education

[cp.tar]

One of my... well, in the USA I guess would be called majors in college... is Information Science, which we students describe as a kind of Computer Science Lite. Nothing like the hard work people in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science put in, anyway. However, people here are being taught about several kinds of computer literacy:

• Using Windows XP and MS Office, i.e. Word, Excel, PowerPoint. And Internet Explorer, gods help us, although our college oficially endorses Firefox.
• Basic programming. In Pascal.
• Basic HTML. Only HTML. Done in Notepad. including the <FONT> tag and all its options.
  At least there's Notepad++ for us who know that it's there.
• Basic active webpage design. In ASP.NET. In that crappy MS Visual Web Developer Thingy 2005, using VB.NET, if I understood correctly. Anyway, crappy program, crappy language, crappily taught.
• Some advanced text processing, which is, as far as I can tell, some advanced functions of MS Word (I'm a freshman, and this is a sophomore course, so I only know what they tell me).
• Some database work in junior and senior years.
• I haven't heard mention of any kind of specialised library, museum or any related software, although there should be.

Anyway, that's why we're starting a club which may well, depending on the interest, develop into an informal parallel study. There are enough of us who know enough about many different areas and who are willing to learn more. So we plan to:

• give courses on several programming languages:
  • Scheme or Lisp and Prolog (very handy for NLP)
  • PHP and Python
  • supplemental courses in Pascal and Basic.
• organise a Build Your Own Computer workshop, for we find the fact that some of our fellow students have to pay someone to upgrade their RAM scandalous.
• teach proper (LaTeX) typesetting (that's if I find enough time to learn it myself - any good on-line manuals you can reccomend?)
• get people to know different operating systems - at least Windows and Linux, Mac OS X if we can get our hands on it, Solaris if we have time; make them aware of multiplatform software and open formats.
• teach proper webpage design - (X)HTML + CSS and then move up.

We're sure we'll get more ideas in time... but I meant this to show at least some of the differences in our views on computer literacy as compared to most of our teachers'. On the other hand, we can expect some of the other kind of teachers to join our courses, so not everything is lost in advance.

Re:context: education

[Anonymous Coward]

Of all things, I never expected that post to be marked as Flamebait. Thought I'd get an interesting response or two, but I guess that'll be it.

Posting anonymously because this is flamebait. And offtopic.

Re:context: education

[Anonymous Coward]

Its literate vs. literary, or educated (Answers.com: Having an education, especially one above the average.)

Re:context: education

[teh kurisu]

How about the European Computer Driving Licence? It's what my university uses for its basic IT skills course.

Re:context: education

[anagama]

And may I introduce you to Merriam Webster which apparently provides more nuance than Answers.com. Note that the primary definition of literate is "can read and write". The secondary definition refers to writing of exceptional quality. Intersting for this topic however, the 3rd example under the secondary definition is "computer literate".

Re:context: education

[jacksonj04]

I've got an ECDL. It's Microsoft all the way.
I've also got an A level in ICT. It's Microsoft all the way.
I've also got a CLAIT certification. It's Microsoft all the way.

The MCSE I'm taking, well. I think you can guess that yourself.

Trouble is, these are the qualifications employers look for. I can roll out Cisco qualifications, Macromedia certifications and a perfect portfolio and they go "Oh, you're not qualified in Microsoft".

Re:context: education

[MrByte420]

I've based my carrear around Linux/Open Source and I get tons of calls if I fish my resume out there.

Re:context: education

[adamjaskie]

Troll? Why?

What you claim to be "lower middle" is what I think kids should end up with by the end of high school, at the very least.

Re:context: education

[klik]

http://www.bcs.org/server.php?show=nav.5829

European Computer Driving License. ECDL. I know quite a number of students at the 17-18 age group have gone for these in the UK, and a number of companies are supporting staff getting them - it at least signifies that someone has proved themselves capable of understanding the use of a computer to a basic extent.

Re:context: education

[mikael]

The basic computer skills include:

Basic computer hardware knowledge

Knowing how to fix basic problems with a computer. In some computer labs, the students would "reserve" desktop systems for themselves by turning the brightness all the way down or by loosening the video cable. Other students would just assume the machine was broken and send a fault notice to the helpdesk.

Basic filesystem knowledge - how to create/delete directories, move and copy files. Being able to use CD-ROM/DVD burners, USB keys

Basic keyboarding skills - being able to write punctuated text in a notepad style
text editor.

Basic computer communication skills - knowing how to receive, send, forward and edit E-mail. Understanding of mailing list etiquette. For large corporations, people would blindly use reply-to-all when they have received an E-mail from a mailing list that they were added to by default and tried to unsubscribe.

Basic workdprocessing/spreadsheet skills - being able to load, edit, print and save files, and export these in a variety of file formats.

Basic webpage authoring - how to create webpages with images, hyperlinks and text.

Re:context: education

[Shoikana]

Seems to me that we could think about "regular" literacy. This isn't defined very well either.. just if someone can read. This doesn't mean they can necessarily read Tolstoy, but that they can communicate in a written form in some language.

I think I'd consider someone to be computer literate if they aren't completely freightened by a computer.. My dad and a few of my friends for instance are *definitely* not computer literate. (My dad has been known to say "Proud to be computer-free" All this means is that when someone tells him he can find something on the Internet, he asks me to look it up) On the other hand, my mom knows how to use her computer for what she needs (generally geneology), so I would consider her computer literate (although she would probably be surprised to hear me say that since I know a whole lot more about computers and because she is constantly asking me questions and asking me to fix things)

Re:context: education

[nick8325]

About LaTeX: I used the "not so short introduction to LaTeX2e", which I thought was pretty good, although I suppose if you're going to teach it you might want to read more than that.

Re:context: education

[guitaristx]

• Here's a start.
• Basic vocabulary
  • Operating system
  • Hard drive
  • Memory [RAM] (and its difference between the hard drive)
  • CPU
  • Monitor
  • Keyboard
  • Network interface
  • Removable storage
  • CD-ROM device (it's not a cupholder!)
• Understanding what the filesystem is, and how it works:
  • Files are not stored in applications, they are stored in files ("I forgot where on the filesystem I saved my file," instead of "I saved a file in Word, and now it's not in Word anymore.")
  • Understanding copying, moving, and deleting files.
  • Understanding that opening an existing file, changing it, and using "Save As..." doesn't modify the original file.
• Computers are not magic:
  • Configuration can't always be automatic; sometimes you have to configure things yourself.
  • If your computer behaves differently than before, it probably means that something has changed.
  • Your computer is doing more than what the visible windows show (e.g. background processes).
• Error messages and confirmation dialogs have important text in them, and shouldn't always be dismissed:
  • If a website unexpectedly asks you to install a program, don't install it!
  • Sometimes, error messages give you the information you need to fix a problem (e.g. insert a floppy disk).
• You are capable of solving many of your own problems:
  • Google is your friend.
  • The man pages (or help files) are your friend.
  • The program's output (dialog boxes, status bar, e.g.) is your friend.

Re:context: education

[KilobyteKnight]

The low boundary is being able to perform common office tasks like email, word processing, and internet searches, and being able to understand and follow general instructions with regard to executing these tasks, and being able to describe specific tasks in these categories in an understandable way. A person who can do these things is going to be an asset to any company who hires them and we teach to this level of performance.

My son at age 2 was able to type in his name and a short password, navigate to the games he wanted to play (Jumpstart Toddler and some Cartoon Network online games), and do basic tasks. By 4 he was able to do everything on your low boundry. I would not consider that to be the low boundry for college or adults, I would consider it the low boundry for first graders. That's stuff that should be taught in kindergarden.

Understanding how computers work and how to use them is no longer a fringe skill. It's as important as knowing how to read and write is in most businesses. IT departments have enough to do without having to hand hold people who have no idea where they saved their document, or what they named it, or if they named it, etc. If a filing clerk kept misplacing the paper folders they'd be fired. Yet somehow it gets a pass when they do it electronically.

I would define a reasonable level of functional computer literacy somewhere between your low and high middle. High middle and high should be taught in high school. Anyone who is below your low middle is no more computer literate than someone who can barely read if they take the time to sound it out is literate in the traditional sense.

Re:context: education

[The_Chicken_205]

Google for lshort.pdf , that should get you the doc.

I've used it numerous times for university assignments (CS course in Univ. of Southampton, UK).

Also have a look for bibtex, its a very nice document reference organiser used in conjunction with latex. It's a bit complex, but worth the effort imo.

Re:context: education

[irablum]

My answer has alwasy been, "I'm too busy doing actual application development and working on projects to get certified, but if you wish to pay for it, I can pass any certification (computer related) that you need."

Ira

Re:context: education

[GmAz]

This is a mouse, this is a keyboard, this is the Start Button/Apple Logo, this is the power button, etc, etc, etc. I have seen far too many college graduates that have never sent an e-mail let alone used the internet. I know it sounds weird, but its true. I used to work at Kinkos a few years ago and I would get teachers that needed to submit their application and resume via a website (www.edjoin.org). It requires that Letters of Recommendation be scanned and uploaded via their website and a resume in either Word format or as a PDF. They didn't even know how to log onto the computers let alone use a scanner. Since my boss wouldn't let me assist them on the "Customer use computers" I would slip out there, give them my card and make $50 each job on the side. I made so much money there doing that its insane.

I would call computer literacy going out and buying the Computers for Dummies book (be it Windows, Apple or whatever) and being able to use and explain the knowledge in that book after reading it without referring to the book every time. Is this literacy for everyone, no, but its the bare basics that everyone should have.

Re:context: education

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

Trouble is, these are the qualifications employers look for.

But what employers, for what jobs? If you're looking for someone to type up your documents and your workplace uses MS Office, then it's perfectly reasonable to look for an indication that a potential employee is competent to use MS Office. On the other hand, where I work (as a developer of cross-platform software) not one of the qualifications you mentioned would carry any weight at all.

Re:context: education

[Anonymous Coward]

Ideally, I think the lower boundary you described should also include some basic computer safety and security knowledge if it doesn't already. At a bare minimum, that knowledge should include:

in general terms what a virus scanner is;
why you should use a virus scanner;
why not to open attachments from strangers;
why you should never tell anyone your password;
why you should choose a good password;
etc.

That's very basic stuff, but as we all know, too many people don't have that type of knowledge. Those insights into security will serve your trainees well no matter what computer-related jobs they obtain.

Re:context: education

[susano_otter]

Biggest waste of money I ever perpetrated on myself was paying Masters Institute for a six-month Novell certification course.

But one of the very first classes was a basic overview of computer hardware: the major components of a PC, their roles, their relationships[1].

That, plus the basics of filesystems, paths, configuration files and wizards, and an introduction to basic networking concepts, is basic computer literacy.

It's not so much that everybody needs to be able to work with computers the way developers and sysadmins work with computers. It's more that everybody needs to have an agreement about the conceptual framework in which computers are understood and discussed.

Re:context: education

[Anonymous Coward]

My dad has been known to say "Proud to be computer-free"

Isn't that a weird attitude? I run into people from time to time who smugly say "Oh, I don't even know how to use a computer", as if it's a point of pride. Being someone who was pounding out shell scripts on a dot-matrix TTY via 300baud acoustic coupler when he was ten, I just can't grok that.

Re:context: education

[luna69]

> The man pages (or help files) are your friend.

For users at the level of understanding suggested by the rest of your list, man pages are anything BUT helpful. I run four machines with three different OS's and have been using and programming computers for 26 years...and I *still* find that man pages, for some non-zero fraction of the times I refer to them, alternately useless and confusing. They often have either too little or too much information, and lack either explanations of things that are important or lack the appropriate structure to make finding specific kinds of information possible, particularly for people just getting their sea legs.

Otherwise, your comments are right on the money...although I'll add to your list of terminology:

"bits, bytes, megabytes and gigabytes...and the differences between them."

and a corrollary:

"kbps vs. 'megabytes per second' vs. 'bytes per second' "

I know loads of otherwise smart techie people who couldn't figure out the difference between those last terms to save their lives.

Re:context: education

[srock2588]

The Build Your Own Computer workshop is a great idea on campus. I had a CS profesor assign a project to design our own PC for under $1000. The project was fairly off topic for the class, but he found it disconcerting that so many CS majors had no clue what was in their machine. Of course, we didn't actually get to build the machines because we were all poor public university students.

Most of the topics you mention here are good thing to teach because Information Systems nor Computer Science nor Engineering touch them, other then the programming languages which your CS department should cover thoroughly. Consider Ruby on Rails as a starter for your web apps although I do enjoy Python for my glue code.

On the other hand, these topics can readily be self taught from internet sources. I would hope the point of Infromation Sciences degree is to teach its students to be capable of teaching themselves these new technologies. Organizing a club is a great idea to actually put this knowledge to practice, but in my experience in college, if you don't have free pizza and beer you won't get much interest.

As a side note, most Universities will give you "Club" status if you have enough people attending regular meetings. This status likely comes with a small amount of money to buy your pizza and beer.

Re:context: education

[Anonymous Coward]

Do not equate your 3rd world curriculum with that in the US. The courses you list would best be described as Information Science Lite.

While not CS or CE, the following courses comprise part of an Information Systems curriculum from a traditional four year university: Business Applications with C++; Information Systems Planning and Analysis, Design, Development, and Implementation; Computer-Based Decision Models with SAS; Knowledge-Based Systems; Object Oriented Programming with C++; Network Administration and Security; Object-Oriented Programming with JAVA; Database Backup and Recovery in a Networked Environment.

Re:context: education

[jgrahn]

So we plan to: [...] teach proper (LaTeX) typesetting (that's if I find enough time to learn it myself - any good on-line manuals you can reccomend?)

There's The (Not So) Short Guide to LaTeX2e, I think it's called. It's adequate for basic usage.

Re:context: education

[cp.tar]

Do not equate your 3rd world curriculum with that in the US. The courses you list would best be described as Information Science Lite.

*shrug*

The courses I listed are just a part of our curriculum, but it's the part that irks us the most.
And we do not compare to the US curriculum for we do not know it; we compare to our neighbouring EE&CS college... so while I may be in error, you are definitely nitpicking.

Most of the stuff you listed is completely irrelevant to our studies.

Re:context: education

[d3matt]

You must also not forget that a Gb is not the same as Ghz! I hate it when CS!! students mix those two up.

Re:context: education

[quanticle]

"I'm too busy doing actual application development and working on projects to get certified, but if you wish to pay for it, I can pass any certification (computer related) that you need."

Which is great if you have a number of years of experience, or can point to some software that you've written as a sample of your work. But for those of us just starting out, having certifications can be an aid in getting one's foot in the door.

Re:context: education

[lightning_queen]

Yes, a student fresh out of high school will almost always fall into the "lower-middle" category on this list. But you forget something: they more than likely grew up with computers, or had access to a computer of some sort from a very early age. You're talking 15 years of using a computer here, even if it is what many people consider "just the basics." There are many adults that don't even know how to turn on a computer, and many more that know how to turn on a computer but don't know enough about computers to know that anti-virus is typically a good thing. Just because they're 30 or 40 years old and has a college degree, doesn't mean that they'll know as much about computers as the 20-year-old that just graduated high school.

It's also a fact that kids adapt better to new things easier than adults. That's why adults seem to need a lot more training on somethings. Sit an 8-year-old in front of a computer running Linux after having him used to Windows and he'll find his way around the new OS before you're done explaining where everything is to the adult. So, by the time he graduates, he could be running scripts and compiling programs and add-ons for an OS that his "teacher" barely knows how to navigate.

Re:context: education

[adamjaskie]

Right. But those 30 to 40 year olds are the ones setting curriculums for the high school students.

Re:context: education

[Anonymous Coward]

This is a good post based on good experience. I remember the mayor of my hometown saying there is no mayor school. He is a trained lawyer in some specific discipline of law. I know he was a defense trail lawyer for criminal cases. He developed a great reputation for getting drug dealers and wealthy criminal types off. Mayor administration is another kind of skill. Computer compentency seems to be one of those things that is being created as it goes along. There is no real computer competency school, just like there is no mayor school.
It is honorable that the curriculum that they have designed here has been working for poor people by making them employable. However the author has put his spin on what competencies are required to really know computers. There is more to learn yet.

Re:context: education

[eneville]

Which is great if you have a number of years of experience, or can point to some software that you've written as a sample of your work. But for those of us just starting out, having certifications can be an aid in getting one's foot in the door.

Get a BSc in the subject, then when asked for experience invent something.

Re:context: education

[jp10558]

I disagree - the high middle to high spectrum listed is really getting into analysis/integration and policy skills - not something directly needed to use a computer effectively. It's like expecting car users to be able to make a business case for a certain model of car to assisting with a new car model design. I dare say most people manage to buy and operate cars for their entire life without even being able to pick out a car on more than the look of the car and possibly claimed gas milage.

High School level ought to be equivelent to the level of using a car or a washing machine - that is some idea of what maintanience needs to be done when, or where in the manual that is listed, and how to get basic stuff done.

Typing up things in Word, using e-mail, electronic filing do not require any of the skills beyond the listed lower bound, and that's all that's necessary in most jobs.

Re:context: education

[bermudatriangleoflov]

Too bad we can't make them all generally literate first.

Re:context: education

[wolenczak]

Consider that your has had a computer nearby every day of his life, and has seen you using it for *many* hours a day. Don't forget there are people out there that check their emails once a month, don't have a computer at home (and don't care to have one).

Re:context: education

[metamatic]

Basic HTML. Only HTML. Done in Notepad. including the <FONT> tag and all its options.

i.e. they're being taught stuff that's already obsolete. They're probably also taught stuff like <font face=...> that was only ever a deprecated hack added in HTML 4. Sad.

Re:context: education

[cp.tar]

That's <font face=.., size=..,> - and the person teaching us doesn't even know the difference between size="x" and pointsize="xpt". He claims size="x" is point size, and the fact that Firefox renders size="22" just the same as size="7" is obviously a Firefox bug.

When I explained the difference between the attributes (it took cca. 5 seconds to look up, as it is obsolete), he got confused for a second, then got back to his previous stand. And so it is all Firefox's fault.

Yes, as obsolete as it gets - and people who were computer illiterate to begin with will profit from this none whatsoever.

Re:context: education

[lightning_queen]

And people wonder why high school education has become all but worthless... Unfortunately, our society doesn't view anyone under the age of 18 to be old enough to know how to make decisions for themselves and therefore, view their opinions as unworthy of taking into consideration, instead of actually listening to them.

And you have to remember, too, that not every 30-40 year-old is computer illiterate. Some of those people do, in fact, know more about computer than any of us will probably ever know. Those were the ones that worked with the room-sized computers with vaccuum tubes, or learned to program a Commodore machine. Granted, they are few and far between, but at least there's a few in our schools that can actually teach beyond the "lower-mid" level, and maybe spark a few they teach into becoming teachers and so more schools can have people that are actually qualified to teach more about computers than just the "lower-mid" level and computer literacy standards will rise. But maybe I'm just dreaming...

Re:context: education

[lightning_queen]

And any person who has ever worked tech support can tell you horror stories of every sort regarding things like anti-virus and networks/Internet.

I would like to add a couple things to your list:

what a spyware scanner is and why and how you should use it

a basic understanding of how a network works - now, I'm not talking about knowing what your net admin knows, but to at least know that when the company's server is down you won't be able to access your email, anything stored on a remote computer, or the Internet; to know that they're all linked through that little wire in the back of their machine shouldn't be that difficult of a concept to grasp.

what hardware drivers and system files are and why they <em>shouldn't</em> be deleted - yes, I've actually seen a few cases of "well, it didn't seem important, so I just deleted it" and then they wonder why they printer/disk drive/computer suddenly doesn't work, "but it worked fine yesterday! I don't know what happened!"

Re:context: education

[adamjaskie]

Yes, which is why decisions such as school curriculums need to involve people of many different ages and backgrounds, who can all listen to each other in a reasonable manner, and take the suggestions of others to heart.

Re:context: education

[lightning_queen]

Exactly! =D Now, let's convince the school district's administration to do that...

Re:context: education

[Anonymous Coward]

OMG kid,
    If you're going to learn all that crap on your own and then some day enter corporate america as a drone why don't you just do the computer science major and be done with it? It will save you pain in the long run. Drop the business side. You will be a slave like the rest of us.

Right now you think you can escape it. You are wrong. You're just another plug that society needs to make room for.

Re:context: education

[dickdono]

Quote:Note that it is entirely possible for someone with extensive programming or sysadmin skills to score pretty low on this continuum. I have met such people.

I agree!! I can't tell you how many mainframe programmers I know -- some with over 15 years of programming experience -- yet they don't know how to even enter simple formulas into an Excel worksheet or produce a half-way decent looking Word document. I don't think that you can call them computer literate.

Re:context: education

[cp.tar]

This isn't the corporate droid^H^Hne you're looking for.

There is no business side.

This is no America, nor do I plan to move there. Ever.
Looking at your government and your way of life makes me feel free, albeit poor.
You may, of course, disagree, but I highly doubt you'll be able to convince me otherwise; I already got foed once for these views and do not wish to discuss them to a great extent.

I may stay and work in my university.
I may start a private school some ten or twenty years from now.
I may work as a translator or interpreter.
But I highly doubt I'll ever work in a corporate culture. I'm not cut for that.

Students in my college are mostly preparing to work in schools, libraries, archives, museums etc. - it's that kind of Information Science.

Real Computer Science, however, entails way too much Electrical Engineering, so I dropped out of that college.

It doesn't mean we cannot be dissatisfied with the crap we're being taught... OK, so some people do need to be taught the most basic things, for most people here have never seen a computer before coming to college, but it frustrates the rest of us. We're here to learn as well.

None of us will probably learn all the things I numbered; we'll each learn one or two or three we're most interested in. And teach others who are interested. Or become interested.

Re:context: education

[LandruBek]

AC, you are getting Information Science and Information Systems confused. The former is sometimes called "informatika"; the latter has a much more pragmatic, applied flavor. Obviously cp.tar's curriculum is light on theory, but (as an example) a course in database backup and recovery is not one of the "missing vitamins" that his program would need to become a bit more welterweight. His plan for a student club, and learning Lisp, Prolog, different OSes, with some hardware hacking, however is the right sort of "supplement" he needs.
 
Just wanted to clarify the difference between Info. Science and MIS.

Re:context: education

[bob frost]

I teach in a School of Information, one that offers only grad-level degrees. We are right now working to revise our curriculum and one key agenda item is to impart a strong set of IT skills among our students, whose future careers will range from Google info-retrieval experts to interface designers, to digital librarians, to museologists. A wide range indeed that we must address. Obviously, many students don't need the basics, but for the librarians in particular, having seen abuses in the past, I want to assure that as managers they won't be gulled and manipulated by IT hustlers selling pricey, proprietary turn-key systems that lock institutions into dreadful equipment-service-support contracts.

That said, the worst one can do in this realm is to teach software- and application-specific skills, or, for that matter, any skills whose half life is less than a decade. To avoid that, we move to the next higher level, that of architectures and inner logics. We pose questions like, "how is a secure network connection best made?," "what might be the advantages of an open document format over, say, .doc?," "what sort of database architecture would be best to handle diverse material objects and generate cross-readable XML?," "under how much cognitive load is a user placed when using this interface as opposed to that one?"... You get the idea.

To master this sort of knowledge/skill set, a student doesn't need to know any programming language except for perhaps a little html, learned only because it's a way to show how code generates output, not to author web pages in Notebook. Yet we expect our students to understand how coding works, what is and is not possible. We give them the knowledge they need to supervise people with a deeper set of technical skills--and to recognize that those with such narrow skill sets might be able to understand questions of project management, contracting, intellectual property, etc so that they can be promoted into managerial positions.

This is, indeed, a very different flavor of "IT literacy" than one would be teaching to middle-aged, laid-off auto workers trying to retool for reemployment. Yet some similarities hold, especially the need to avoid generating skill sets that are highly context and time dependent. The auto-workers (yes, again, the car analogies), or worse, those airline mechanics got laid off because their skill sets were brittle: once the technology or corporate agendas changed, they were useless to their employers. As educators, we should never repeat that mistake.

Re:context: education

[insignis]

Under "Basic vocabulary" you forgot:
Case/tower/chassis (and its difference from the hard drive/CPU)

Re:context: education

[RoloDMonkey]

I have to take issue with two of your assertions. First, I am by no means a Microsoft fan. In fact, I haven't used any version of Visual Studio since I left school, and I don't think it should be used to teach programming. However, the .NET platform is very powerful. Even VB taught right, and used right, can solve a small problem without having to be a l33t programmer.

Second, I taught computers for years, and do you know what I used to introduce programming to kids as young as 5th grade? HTML, using Notepad. I forced them to use Notepad because it required them to understand the concepts being taught, and to think. They couldn't fall back on a word processor and "Save as HTML" and they couldn't rely on an HTML editor to do all the work for them, or correct their mistakes.

Before you reply with "HTML isn't programming!" you are right, but by the time my students were finished they understood debugging, nesting, indentation, whitespace, properties and values (your <FONT> tag). The next year they started on Javascript and CSS.

Re:context: education

[neodaoist]

I should think that to be comuter literate one should at least know binary arithmetic, what a Turing machine does, how to turn algebraic equations into lines of code, how to use a logic statement to make a decision, and these days, HTML and XML. We should all know how these tools flow through silicon to produce what we see on the screens of our computers and how far we can trust what we see and why. It also wouldn't hurt to teach kids how DNA works like a Turning machine to manufacture all the protiens and other chemicals that make up the bodies of all life on Earth.

Re:context: education

[cp.tar]

I have nothing against text editors. I'm a Vim man myself. I only object to Notepad.

For instance, I see nothing wrong with syntax highlighting - for one, people may understand things like tags, attributes, strings etc. more readily: not only do you explain them what they are, but they see them as different.

And I said nothing about Visual Studio - only about Visual Web Developer. And I'll say it again, having worked with it today: it's crap. It's buggy. I, for one, hate it - and I'm not the only one, either.

Re:context: education

[richardpaulhall]

Touch typing must be very high on the list, even 20 wpm. Rick

For starters...

[Anonymous Coward]

..computer literacy does NOT mean knowing how to do shit in Windows, it means knowledge of basic concepts.

Interesting.

[SatanicPuppy]

Computer literacy is one of those things that covers a lot of ground. In my mind, this includes a basic familarity with hardware. A savvy individual should be able to plug in a new network card, or a new hard drive. These are not advanced hardware tasks. I also think a certain amount of hardware troubleshooting is needed; a user should be able to tell if they have a dead network conntection, or a dead monitor, or a dead computer (or a dead mouse...yes, I've talked to people who can't tell. One lady even triumphantly told me that not only had she replaced the mouse (four times, according to her), she had also replaced the mouse pad. Her problem was a mouse problem, and it was fixed by replacing the mouse).

As far as software, I think computer literacy means needing to be able to figure out a piece of out-of-the-box software. Not the ability to use word or office, or whatever, but the ability to sit down in front of an unfamiliar piece of software, and fiddle with it in an intelligent way. The ability to look up a manual and read it.

It's not about being a power user. Not everyone is a power user. Most people aren't, really. It's really, in my mind, just about not being helpless when confronted with something new.

Re:Interesting.

[Anonymous Coward]

That same woman probably thinks replacing the floor mats in her car might help the engine run better.

Re:Interesting.

[Kbo1982]

If only we could teach people to fiddle in an intellegent way. I agree that it is the best way to learn. But the fact of the matter is that people who either are not good with computers, or don't conisder themselves good with computers have a fear barrier to fiddling. You can help some of them overcome it,but as soon as one little thing goes wrong, they panic and it's back to square 1. Sounds silly to us, but I can't tell you how many students have come to me in tears because "they hit the wrong button and errased everything" every time I end up saying "How did we deal with this last time" and only about half of them remember the last 5 times this happened undo fixed it.

Sometimes I really think that 1 semester of P.C. Literacy will soon turn into 2. Every semester I have a majority of my students who I feel are just getting to the point where they are starting to be comfortable trying things, and know how to fix things they mess up. But since most of them are just in the class because everyone in the whole school must take it, I doubt the majority of them continue learning on their own.

A 2 semester format would also allow more time to teach about hardware. It falls to the wayside in 1 semester, because there are very few (non-retail or manual labor) jobs that don't require at least knowing word processing. But at many of these jobs, you aren't allowed to touch the computers.

I know it's not as much so at Universitys, but at Community College, the goal is to get you in a job as fast as possible, with as little fluff being taught as possible. I'm not saying I consider hardware fluff, but most of my students do. Many of them ask for help with home computers, and are not interested in me walking them through it, or sending them to a helpful article online with pictures, they want me to do it, or tell them someone who will. Sometimes I'll be able to talk them into beliving in themselves and trying on their own, but it usually requires me going into cheerleader mode. I kid you not, walk into my school and you will see a petite 23 year old jumping up and down and all but doing cartwheels.
Not saying any of this is right, just saying it's how things have been in my first year of teaching.

Retraction

[L33THa0R69]

Oh come to think of it that joke is almost as old as that term.

There I bet you all to it.

The joke is still more relevant than the term. I think employers who may have in the past looked for computer literate on a CV take it for granted. The fact that if you wrote the CV you are literate, if you sent your CV in Word format though email then you are computer literate.

There are so many things you can do on a computer that if you need someone with certain skills you have to be more specific than "computer literate".

searching and researching

[nEoN nOoDlE]

I think the ability to research and find information is one of, if not the most important thing in becoming not just computer literate, but literate. Knowing where to go to search for topics online, knowing where to go to search for help for your word processor, etc are all very important. I spend a good portion of my time at work looking through help files and web sites trying to figure out how to do new things. I also spend a good portion of time researching things on my personal time through Wikipedia. As Einstein said, "Never memorize something that you can look up."

I think a lot of computer illiterate users are that way because they never bother (or don't know how) to find the answers to the simplest questions on their own. As an aside, though, while the knowledge of proper searching can be taught, most people would rather have the answer handed to them, so even if they know how to find the solution themselves, they'll still bug the tech guy. You can lead a horse to water...

just the basics

[Anonymous Coward]

L33T Spek n aim tlk k thx bye!

MS-DOS

[Anonymous Coward]

Unless you can get the mouse driver and the Novell redirector running with 630K free, you don't know shit.

Re:Interaction, information organisation, networki

[Dadoo]

Surfing and email

I'll agree with that, but I think you need to explicity mention surfing. Knowing how to use a search engine is one of the most powerful Internet skills you can have. I know I would have a much more difficult time doing my job without it.

One possible definition

[Geminii]

The ability to perform the tasks they want or need to do. Although this does not take into account the ability to perform maintenance and/or repairs when the system deviates from ideal function. I can drive a car, change a tyre and check the oil. I don't know how to swap out an engine, but I could take some car maintenance courses and learn. This makes me 'car literate' for 99% of daily tasks, even though I couldn't hold down a career as a garage mechanic based on what I currently know.

Re:One possible definition

[Marc_Hawke]

I don't know you, but I think you could...(hold down a career as a garage mechanic.)

Cars have manuals, and they are a heckuva lot easier to read than man pages. (they have pictures. :) ) Now, if you started your own garage, and you were the only one working on it...you might run out of money/customers before you were able to come up to full speed.

However, if you started today as a new mechanic, with only the skills of 'change a tire and check the oil' you would be able to learn the rest of it fast enough to not-get-fired. (I wouldn't count on employee of the month anytime soon.)

With the velocity of the computer world, the main skill it takes to survive is the ability to learn and adapt. You can go through 4 major tool upgrades and programming languages in a year at a software company and you won't be in THAT bad of shape. Just by the industry you are in, you've gained the ability to rapidly learn new things.

I just repaired my swamp cooler. Not a big deal, but I did it myself. I disassembled and reassembled the garbage disposal in my sink. I'm the sole maintainer of my lawnmower. I've never been trained in this stuff...but since I'm not afraid to 'tinker' and smart enough to look things up. I can do anything.

Who knows... maybe that's a chicken/egg situation. Maybe instead of learning those skills by working with computers, I already had those skills, so I was able to survive the computer world.

Try stuff!

[kherr]

The biggest problem with learning how to use computers I've seen from neophytes is the fear of trying stuff. Everything I know about computers comes from wanting to find out how stuff works. I tinker and mess around and do stupid things and eventually figure out what things are and how they work.

Too many people are afraid they'll break the computer and resort to memorizing what they are shown. Since they only do the one thing they are trained to they are unable to grasp the underlying components and what it all means.

To be literate you have to tinker. Try stuff. Break things, get someone to fix them. Then try some different stuff.

Re:Try stuff!

[scott_evil]

Yeah... try it on your own stuff and fix it yourself. If I see my staff trying something they're not allowed to do I come down on them like a ton of bricks. IT staff should not be required to fix problems caused by a breach of policy. (Yes, I used to work in IT).

Re:Try stuff!

[level_headed_midwest]

I learned the same way- by doing. I have probably ruined installs of most every OS from DOS 4.00 on a 286 on up to 2.6-kernel Linux distribution this way, but since I knew how to back up data, I learned from every mistake and was able to recover quickly.

There are only a few rules to using a computer:
1. Back up anything and everything that want to keep if anything happened.
2. Make sure you have copies of your OS and also programs and their reg keys (if you use proprietary apps) on hand.
3. Don't click on popups and keep your OS patched and have a firewall, etc.
4. If you are doing something that messes around with the OS or programs, read the instructions.
5. If you screw up anything, it's okay as long as you followed Rules #1 and 2 as you are only out a little bit of time as you can recover!

Re:Try stuff!

[ottffssent]

Amen.

Since "computer literate" is just a nicer way of saying "speaks computer", it seems reasonable that we approach the problem the same way we approach literacy in natural languages. Children learn to speak by watching, emulating, screwing up, and getting corrected. Eventually they pick up patterns and learn to apply them in novel situations. This is the way most /. readers became computer geeks. We watched (or perhaps read in a manual), emulated, screwed up, and got spanked by the computer dutifully deleting everything we told it to. Eventually we figured things out.

This is not the way most people approach computers. And it shows.

I'm sick of car analogies, so I'm going to try a new one. Bear with me. A computer is like a wood shop. If you go in and play with the various pieces, you'll hit the chisel with the hammer wrong and it'll bounce and cut you. You'll probably cut yourself on a saw or two also. And that birdhouse you're trying to make? Crap. But you'll learn something. If, instead, you go into the wood shop because someone told you there's a hammer in there, and you can use it to pound nails, you'll never even see the mitre box.

I guess that kind of works.

Too bad learning language takes hours a day, for a year or so.

Re:Try stuff!

[Anonymous Coward]

Everything I know about computers comes from wanting to find out how stuff works.

Beautifully put! That's the inquisitive mind at work. I grew up always having to know why. Others were happy that the VCR did what it did, but I had to know why. I got into a lot of trouble as a result, but this didn't discourage me.

This is, most likely, why I'm a computer programmer now. Unfortunately, most people don't think like this. They know that they put a tape in a VCR (DVD, whatever) and it just works. And they're happy. They don't have the insane curiosity. They don't have to know why.

But that's what separates us from them. We, who have to know how/why, who take things apart to find out, who read manuals or articles... from those who just want to push a button and make something happen.

Computers, be it Windows, Mac, or whatever, tend to blur that line. To use a computer successfully, some knowledge of how it works, some knowledge of the history, is required. Without it, you wind up with viruses, pop-ups, or other annoyances. And most users don't want to accept this. They expect their PC to just work. You can reasonably expect this from your VCR, DVD, TV, or even car, but computers are advancing too fast for this to be a reasonable expectation...

I digress...

Re:Try stuff!

[dhasenan]

When you're supposed to be working, work.

When you're faced with a new application and no training is given, try to find out how to do something on your own before asking someone else for help.

When you have an actual problem, ask IT. Save the more dangerous monkeying for home, where you have to rely on yourself to fix your problems anyway, or pay large sums of money.

If these people don't see the difference between computers they own and their workstations, then they have more serious issues to deal with.

Re:Try stuff!

[IHateChoosingAName]

About your #1 (backup anything and everything), be sure to also include the testing of backups. Imagine trying something new out on your system and screwing it up, thinking you are 100% safe from that screw-up by a backup and finding out when you are trying to restore that backup that it was corrupted.

Re:Try stuff!

[Inda]

Go back to cars please. :)

Don't hit chisels with hammers, ever. Don't even use a mallet. If you need to hit a chisel then you are trying to remove too much material in one go or the chisel is blunt. And what do blunt tools cut, kids? Fingers!

People lose digits in workshops. My father lost three on a spindle moulder. My close friend lost the tops of all his fingers on a surface planer. Don't use wood working tools without the proper training.

Thanks for listening,

Inda (ex-patternmaker/model maker)

As your Family would put it...

[KajiCo]

being able to work with computers...

Try a Context Switch

[yancey]

Whenever I have a question like this, I try to devise a similar question from a non-computer perspective (a different context) to help me wrap my brain around the idea. This also happens to work especially well when trying to explain computer issues to those who are not computer literate.

For example, "What does vehicle literate mean?" A car, like a computer, is a single complex machine that the average person above a certain age is expected to know how to operate. So how does one become "car literate"? Because you know how to drive one vehicle does not mean you can operate a boat or airplane or the space shuttle. So "computer literate" probably does not mean that you can operate any computer, just the most common variety (e.g. Windows and Office). Even then, you might know how to drive an automatic and not a standard (Windows vs Linux).

Analogy is a great tool to not only improve others understanding of a given concept but also your own.

Just for fun consider this: Computer support technicians and doctors are similar in many ways. They are both supposed to be highly paid, highly trained, highly skilled, and highly knowledgeable about an extremely complex machine that they did not design or create and of which cannot possibly know everything about. Often, they rely on their limited experience to make a best guess about the root cause of the machine's particular problem and then follow up with lots of testing to see if they are correct or not. As you probably know, some computer support people, trained and certified or not, seem to have an innate gift for solving computer problems while others should never be allowed to touch a computer. Makes you think about your doctor, eh?

Re:Try a Context Switch

[fatcop]

well put and very true :)

Re:Try a Context Switch

[Canordis]

You're confusing contextual levels though - "Car literate" isn't the same as "Vehicle Literate". I'd say being vehicle literate precludes knowing how to operate and maybe repair a single type of vehicle and knowing the general principles underlying all types of vehicles; that is, how different types of engines work, what is more likely to break with them and how to fix them, basic notions of mechanics and electronics, and knowing the difference between different types of vehicles, hopefully with a considerable knowledge about how they are different, how they are similar, and what makes them move. Being car literate only involves knowing how to operate a car and the basic maintenance every car owner needs to know.

Similarly, computer literacy involves knowing the most basic concepts about how computers and the internet work; knowing what the Web is, what email is, what a protocol is, what a server and a client are, and being able to tell the difference. Knowing what is software and what is hardware. Knowing how software is created (Not necessarily knowing how to create software) and being able to comfortably operate a single environment, without being utterly clueless in another; a truly computer literate user can teach himself to use a new operating system in a matter of hours (As long as it is similar enough as his previous environment; you can't expect a computer literate Windows user to be perfectly comfortable with bash, but you can expect him to understand and use Gnome), and doesn't take too long to learn its quirks. Knowing how to use Windows and Office isn't being computer-literate, it's being Windows-literate. The same goes for any other environment, although most Linux users (Besides hackers) come from the Windows world and are reasonably computer literate.

No one real concrete cirriculum.....

[Anonymous Coward]

just stay open-minded and read lots

For Windows?

[ninja_sqrl]

If someone is going to be using any flavour of Windows, the absolute least they need to know how to do is run Antivirus and spyware scanning software, and probably a software firewall too. And by running I mean updating, regular scans, recognizing threats, etc. Once a person is to that point, I feel safe in letting them learn on their own, as they should be at least fairly well protected from anything they try to do to themselves. I keep a 2 page manual on how to run common av/spyware software handy for any service calls I do, just so the user can be informed for the future.

How to use Help

[karearea]

Knowing how to use the whatever help function on the system. And how to find deeper more comprehensive information on the 'net.

It's like that whole knowledge is power thing ... it isn't the knowledge that is the power it is the knowing how to use the knowledge that is the power.

People knowing how to find the information out themselves is the first step towards becoming a computer literate person.

Re:How to use Help

[Anonymous Coward]

I've noticed that the help functions in Windows are absolutely worthless. Sometimes, information is provided, but in those cases, it always manages to side-step whatever is actually at issue. Usually, however, the explanation is redundant. For instance, I may be presented with a text field labeled "Options", but I'm not entirely sure what options I could enter, or even what the syntax is for entering them. A quick reference to the help button nets me just "This is a text field for inputting options". Nah, really? There needs to be some easily accessible repository of help for the computer illiterate or semi-literate to be able to reference.

How to create/read a well-formed XML document

[Anonymous Coward]

From configuration files, to the web, to office documents XML seems to be everywhere these days and some basic knowledge on what it is, how it works, and why it's useful is important.

That's unreasonable

[DavidinAla]

That's like saying you should be able to assemble a car before you can drive. Or put a stove together before you can cook. The fact that you even think this is another indication that many of the people who work in IT (or have serious interest in it) don't understand what the end user really needs. A normal, everyday user should be able to get real work done easily without having to understand all of the jargon that you and I understand. It's absurd to expect him to do so.

David

Re:That's unreasonable

[Oink]

Thank you for saying so! This seems to constantly escape many a slashdotter =)

Re:That's unreasonable

[ottffssent]

Someone who can't differentiate between an exle, differential, and brake pad is not "car literate". (S)He may be able to drive, and if that's all the person requires, there's no shame in it. The problem with a term like "computer literacy" is precisely that it means different things to different people. I think "computer literate" is a rather broad term, so requiring a rather broad set of skills before you can apply it does not seem unreasonable to me.

Obviously requiring that level of computer literacy before allowing someone to use a computer is completely unreasonable and hugely inefficient. On the other hand, letting someone who can't distinguish between email and a web page loose with an admin account on a Windows box is a horrible idea too. It just happens to be a more accepted form of stupidity. As you say, anything else would be unreasonable. But the current situation is untenable and is only getting worse, so something's got to give.

Unfortunately, user education doesn't look to be working. And the ignorant aren't going to stop buying computers: they're just too convenient and attractive. So the only thing I see as having the faintest chance of improving the situation is better software. Writing secure, functional, efficient, attractive software isn't hard. It's not some deep mystical science. But doing it in a time frame and budget such that it can effectively compete in the marketplace with glittery, insecure, buggy software is proving harder than it should be.

In my experience, after a few machines with malware preinstalled, people start to realize that something is wrong, and maybe it's their choice of vendor. Macs are starting to look better and better to a lot of people, and while it's a false panacea, it does indicate that more and more focus is being put on system quality (both hardware AND software), and less and less on raw speed. Before you whip out your story of how you legitimately need the fastest money can buy, remember that we're talking primarily about home and office use, where doubling the system's RAM is way more important than doubling its CPU clock, and much cheaper too. The widening gulf between the average user's actual hardware requirements and what a modern computer can provide is not something even a nasty malware load can hide, and users are starting to realize that they're upgrading their hardware to fix software problems. The second time that happens, they start figuring out that maybe it's worth paying a bit extra to try to get better software in the first place.

Baby steps.

Re:That's unreasonable

[Neko-kun]

That's like saying you should be able to assemble a car before you can drive

It would certainly cut down on the number of accidents...

Re:That's unreasonable

[theLOUDroom]

That's like saying you should be able to assemble a car before you can drive.

It's more like requiring someone to know how to change a tire, check their fluids, change their oil, and do a basic safety inspection.

He's not saying everyone should be able to design a Pentium.

At some level he's right too. Too many people on the road have no idea how a car works or what to do when the unexpected happens. Not knowing that the light on your dash that says "Brake" indicates the presence of a dangerous situation is just plain negligent. Same thing with bald tires, blown light bulbs, unadjusted mirrors, etc.

I only halfway agree with him though. A person should understand the key parts and what they do, just like with a car, a stove, whatever. They don't need to be able to build one, but they need to understand the difference between RAM and a hard disk. Too many people think that they can somehow not teach these concepts. It leaves to people with a fundamentally crippled understanding of what they're using. There are certain basic concepts that you simply have to know or you don't know what you're doing.

Re:That's unreasonable

[sfe_software]

That's like saying you should be able to assemble a car before you can drive...

There is a big difference here. The average motorist can get by without ever having to know the internal workings of the car. Cars come with warranties -- if anything goes wrong internally, someone comes out and tows the car, and fixes the problem while you drive a loaner if the problem was not your fault.

If you (for example) put Diesel fuel in a gasoline car, I doubt your warranty would cover it. If you failed to shift properly (redlined the engine RPMs), the warranty would also not likely cover the repairs. Some level of knowledge is required to operate and maintain an automobile.

Computers aren't much different. There is an expected level of knowledge required to operate a machine this complex. If you fail to meet this requirement, and therefore harm the machine, no warranty covers this.

Granted, most problems (viruses, malware, etc) don't physically harm the machine; however the repairs involved do cost the user real money. The only difference is this: the State requires that you learn certain rules before you can drive a car, where anyone can operate a computer regardless of their ability to do so. Cars can easily cause harm if operated improperly, where computers cannot. This is why there are government requirements to operate a motor vehicle, and not to operate a computer.

In other words, one should learn to operate a computer in the environment they intend to use it. If one chooses not to do so, they only hurt themselves and their own investment. Buying a computer is no guarantee that it will be usefull to you without some effort. The car analogy simply doesn't work, because when you are in control of a 2,000 pound machine, you are putting lives at risk; thus, governments usually restrict operation of such vehicles to those who can prove their ability to do so (eg, driver's tests, etc).

Failure to learn to properly operate a computer only hurts yourself, thus no such rules are required. For the same reasons, there shouldn't be any such rules in place to operate a computer. A teenager operating a computer isn't going to cost me my life if things get out of control as could be the case with a car.

This is why I find the car analogy useless.

Re:That's unreasonable

[xee]

Those normal, everyday users are not expected to be computer literate! The question was "what is computer literacy?"

Re:That's unreasonable

[adamUndefined]

The problem is that people with no understanding of their computers are now having an effect on others. Ask any business that has been affected by a DDOS attack by a botnet.

Re:That's unreasonable

[ThePengwin]

Well people at least need to know there isnt a little gnome inside their case called steve who is putting files into folders and bringing them out again. they should at least know the Very basics of hardware. Like files are stored on a hard drive or the processor makes calculations.. so they know where their stuff is in real life :P

Re:That's unreasonable

[pembo13]

Then you either have never seen the inside of a computer , have never seen the inside of a car, or both. Anybody who wants to can put together a modern computer. They are very much idiot proofed.

Re:That's unreasonable

[dalroth5]

Yes, and therein lies the entire problem. The 'average' person (whatever _that_ is) just wants to _use_ the computer, in exactly the same way that they use a car, or a TV set.

However, it's not a car. It's not a TV set. And now that we have the Intarweb, bad people who want to rob you or use you to rob somebody else, can make your PC do it for them.

There are about two choices:

(a) Disconnect from the Intarweb. Some people are already doing this. Most people don't want to.

2. Learn how to protect yourself. Some people are already doing this. Most people don't want to.

And thus we find ourselves in this same, endlessly looping conversation.

Re:That's unreasonable

[Anonymous Coward]

And there's nothing wrong with that. As a matter of fact, I made both my kids (daughters, for the gender-biased) completely disassemble and re-assemble a lawn-mower engine (so that it would still run) before I allowed them to use their learners permit. Why? Because understanding the fundamentals to at least a very basic level is critical to developing good diagnostic skills. Now, nobody will ever get away with telling my kids that they are out of turn-signal fluid.

Understanding the basics of the hardware, OS, etc is not out of line for anyone who will be using a computer without supervision.

Re:That's unreasonable

[Anonymous Coward]

Damn right! My gnome's named Fredchook.

Re:That's unreasonable

[Anonymous Coward]

Your analogy is wrong. Having yourself officially declared "computer literate" does not mean you can suddenly use a computer. The idea here is, "What is Computer Literate?" You should be able to do basic things like know how things work to be computer literate. That still allows people who are not computer literate to use the computer. Mechanics can drive before they fix cars, but until they know how to fix cars they are not mechanics.

If programming were a requirement for computer literacy, you would not be eligible....your logic is pathetic.

Re:That's unreasonable

[waveclaw]

That's like saying you should be able to assemble a car before you can drive. Or put a stove together before you can cook.

Do much camping or fishing? The campfire is your stove. You usually have to assemble those by hand each time. If you have ever gone camping, you really want someone that can start and put out a fire. (And not burn up the day's catch of fish and your nice steaks becuase they don't know that well-done does not mean 'make it charcoal.')

I will agree that the modern automobile is encasuplated enough that most people will never have the challenge -or joy- of building a car from parts. Additionallly, a whole economy exists to keep drivers out from under the hood.

Computers, like anything else, is a GIGO enterprise. The more you put in, the more you get out. PCs, Mac or Unix or Microsoft, have long been glorified typewriters. 10 years ago, you needed basic typing, mousing and -yes- printing skills. A Personal Computer was all about printing stuff.

The 21st century PC is a telephone + TV + arcade + soapbox. (Even if some people insist on printing out every webpage they see.) Basic skills for those uses include (the rarely taught in school) social ones: Bullsh*t filtering and howoto avoid common scams. Before you only needed to know what is a file, filesystem and how to use at least one document editor. Now you need to know what is a network, email/IM, webpages and basic security.

[RANT]
Teaching basic skills is one thing, getting people to use them is another. The latter is far harder. I'd love to think people are smart enough to learn the basics, but experience has shown that people will screw up campfires, park their car's but leave the windows down and browse the web with IE. It should come as no surprise that forests burn, cars are stolen or ransacked and enough Microsoft PCs get owned each day to make zombie networks a sellable comodity.
[/RANT]

Re:That's unreasonable

[Anonymous Coward]

You are quite correct: You shouldn't need to be able to build a car from scratch to drive. But, at the same time, if my car's tire blows out, I would hope I'd be able to say, "Holy rusted metal, Batman, my tire has blown out!" as opposed to "Oh teh noes! Something is wrong with my car!" And, in the same fashion, I'd hope that I would then be able to get out, jack the car up, pop the spare on, and then drive to a service station to get a new road tire (as spares, as a rule, suck) instead of having to call somebody else to do it.

Thus is should be with computer users.

If your tire blows out and you call someone and say there's something wrong with your car and you have no idea what and they come out to meet you, when they see your car, they'll say, "Well duh, you blew out a tire," and fix it with ease. If you call IT screaming "It won't work I can't get it to come on!!!1one", and the tech guy comes out and takes one look behind your computer and says, "Uh, you tripped over the power cord and unplugged it," he will likewise be annoyed. I don't think the ability to assemble a computer is essential for literacy, but the ability to self-diagnose, at least the simpler stuff, is. I don't need to be able to tell if my fuel injector is getting a little wonky, but I should definitely be able to tell you if my radiator is leaking.

Re:That's unreasonable

[Phroggy]

I suppose you could assemble one if you already had all the components you needed, and some instructions. Maybe. The average person could most certainly NOT build one from scratch starting with buying components individually. AGP vs PCI-E? PCIe-x16 vs PCIe-x1 vs PCI-X? VGA vs DVI? ATAPI vs ATA/133 vs SATA vs SCSI? 3.5" vs 2.5"? DDR2 SDRAM? SO-DIMMs? IEEE802.11g vs IEEE1394b vs IEEE1284? They're not interchangeable, and if you don't know how to tell the difference, you can't build one.

Personally, I have no idea how to change the oil in my car, I just know I need to go back to JiffyLube whenever the sticker in the corner of the windshield says it's time, and they'll sell me $150 worth of services that I may or may not actually need, but they tell me it's a good idea, and who am I to argue with a professional? That doesn't mean I can't drive.

The origin of Information Technology

[Zarf]

The first unit of information technology is the pen and paper. The computer implements the ideas of the programmer about how the user thinks. The computer represents the elements of the problem in an easily manipulated way.

After 25 years we can say these things about interacting well with a computer. Programs manipulate data. Data represents information. Information and data have no meaning even though rules can manipulate data in seemingly meaningful ways. Users define meaning nothing else does that.

Users should understand the basic ideas behind data format and program navigation. They should know that format A is nearly universal or how to ask a program what it can read. They should be able to wrap their minds around the concept that transforming data from format A to format B alters only the model with which it is stored. Then they should know that different programs know how to use different models.

In my dream future an introduction course might start like this: There are three components to a well built program: The view, the model, and the controller. The model represents the data we are interested in logically, the view shows it to us graphically or in an otherwise comprehensible form... it allows us to communicate with a controller which follows rules established to manipulate the model in a way that is consistent with our understanding of the problem we are trying to solve or the parameters of the task we are attempting to accomplish.

Maybe in a hundred years we'll get all this down to a concise understandable form. By then we'll break this down as well as we do books.

When my son learned "how to read" at school I learned that now-a-days we teach kids books have basic components, a spine, a cover, liner pages, a publish block, an ISBN number, a Title, a sub title, a set of contents, and pages. All this even though I had taught him to read at the age of four. I used the method described in "To kill a Mocking Bird" and to my surprize it worked. Apparently, however, this didn't mean he was literate.

So then kids: This is a browser, it has a back button and a forward button this moves us through history. It has a URL bar that tells us what its looking at right now. The big box in the center is the content. There are many kinds of browsers each works a little differently but nearly all of them have these same elements. Now let's cover the word processor and the spreadsheet...

Right on the money.

[Meetch]

IMHO true computer literacy is knowing your current limitations, and knowing that you can't pretend they don't exist. Add the knowledge of how to research what you need or teach yourself and the world should be your oyster. Many moons ago I got a job after an interview which included a question like "Do you know HTML?" The answer was of course, yes. Then I went home, found suitable references, read the book, and practiced it. By the time I started working for them I knew more about the standard then than I do now.

That's when you should be able to sit through an interview and easily convince a potential employer that even if you don't know the semantics of language X, you'll know the basics in 24 hours and by the time you start work the following Monday you're basically fluent in it. Better still, when you apply for the job, learn at least the basics of the language before the interview. Just remember that a) your style of approach to a solution is often just as important as your general knowledge of the technology and b) all bullshit will get you in a smart workplace is unemployed again 2 weeks later.

POWERPOINT!!!!

[SlappyBastard]

Because, you know, literacy usually means knowing things that suck, like Keats, Wilde and Bobby Burns.

The closest thing to that in computing terms is knowing PowerPoint.

Re:Interaction, information organisation, networki

[glens]

Pretty much "ditto that" in my opinion.

Rather than teaching particular program details, just teach what the different types of programs do; how they all basically operate the same within type if well-designed.

A person cannot be considered "computer literate" unless they can sit down in front of just about anything they might reasonably encounter and be able to get at least rudimentary stuff done. Learning just how to drill down a specific system's menus (or across "ribbons" if they ever appear) to the exclusion of alternate methods is almost worse than no education at all.

How to use non-MS systems

[Stormwatch]

If you know nothing but Windows, you're not computer-literate.

Re:How to use non-MS systems

[klang]

Level zero is realizing that

The Computer is not the big box on the table
The Harddisk is not the big box under the table
The Color of the box does not matter
It's not "how many RAM's" but "how much RAM"

Level one is realizing that

Text editing is not Word
Spreadsheet is not Excel
Presentation is not Powerpoint
Communication is not Outlook
News is not Explorer
The Internet is not WWW

i.e. realizing what you don't need a specific program to fullfill a specific task.

Re:How to use non-MS systems

[icydog]

Level two is knowing what "level up" means.

Re:How to use non-MS systems

[DaoudaW]

You left out some...

Database is not Access
Graphics editor is not Photoshop

Level Two

OS is not Windows

or actually

The operating system is not the GUI.

Re:How to use non-MS systems

[panaceaa]

There's a big space between your level 0 and level 1. One must learn that documents are created with text editors, and an example is Word. To create a chart of data, one uses a spreadsheet, an example being Excel. At this point, one doesn't need to know other examples besides Word and Excel -- one just needs to know the different types of applications available and how to invoke them. After that one can start learning what other applications also fill those types.

Re:How to use non-MS systems

[klang]

You are so right. I forgot about databases and graphics.. Should they be included in "Level one" though?

If people in general could just get to level one .. (well, Microsoft's market would crash)

The OS IS the GUI, if you use Windows (or Mac for that matter) .. and as a large part of the population haven't reached level one, there is some way to go before we have a world where you can choose between the GUI and the OS is not joined at the hip. Yes, on Linux you can choose your GUI, but I would consider that a special case... didn't Apple sue some (Linux) GUI group for making a Macintosh look and feel GUI for Linux? ..

An old saying.

[niteice]

It's been said that one understands something best when they can teach it to someone else. Teaching may not necessarily be required in this case, but I'd say that if you can fix a typical fucked up computer (IE, no firewall, but no pr0n sites) non-destructively, then you have a pretty good handle on things. And I mean really fixing it, not just reinstalling Windows into a new folder.

Obligatory paper promotion

[RomulusNR]

http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/romulus/papers/mywr/re port.htm

and Ctrl-F

[Anonymous Coward]

I used Ctrl-F in front of my parents the other day while they were trying to find somebody's name in a long document, and they acted like I knew some sort of gypsy magic.

Re:and Ctrl-F

[Ithika]

I really appreciate the fact that Firefox treats /pattern as a search. Yes, I could press Ctrl-F but somehow the slash seems that bit more voodoo, and comes instinctively from vim and man pages and who-knows-where else.

I wonder what other clever things are hidden all over the place?

Computer Literacy Levels

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think you should think of just Computer Literate or not, You should think what level of Computer Literacy. In my last job, we divide people into different groups of computer literacy.

Newbie: Very little knowledge "Where is the on button?"
User: Basic Knoeledge "Microsoft Office"
Power User: Lots of Knowledge "Can change features, "
Expert: More Knowledge "Only source of info, Can install SW"
Guru: Most Knowledgeable "OS support"

I'm sure that you and/or slashdot can come up with more and better groups.

Literacy, like education, isn't about facts...

[ConceptJunkie]

... it's about how to think.

One of the reasons my employer is moving from Tcl to another development platform for Web infrastructure, probably Java, is because they claim they can get more Java programmers than Tcl programmers. While this might be true, I would argue that they will get exactly as many competent, effective Java programmers as they get Tcl programmers, in other words, very few. Any programmer worth the appellation can do his job regardless of the tool.

Equating "literacy" with the ability to use Microsoft Office (or something similar) is like equating mathematics knowledge by memorizing the times tables up to 100. Useful for a very specific, narrow range of tasks, but completely worthless when presented with a new type of problem.

Unfortunately, it is far easier to test for memorization than for actual thinking, and this is the route of least resistance our education system likes to take.

The Kids Are Alright

[rueger]

I have a seven year old daughter who is using MSN Instant Messenger before she can even write complete sentences.

She knows how to browse the 'net, how to use all manner of games and learning programs, and it doesn't occur to her that other people don't have this level of comfort with computers.

To her the computer is something that "just works" and she has no knowledge of what goes on under the hood.

Isn't that ultimately the goal of personal computers? A simple to use tool that doesn't need ubergeek skills to use?

Forget about "computer literacy" and focus on making the whole experience seamless and effortless.

a computer is not an appliance

[cretog8]

...at some point, for some people, this won't be true. But mostly, a "computer" we refer to is a general-purpose tool, far more general-purpose than other kinds of tools people are familiar with. This generality implies you can do more with it than browse the web and compose Word documents if you want, which is great, but understanding the generality can also help understand how things work and why they can go wrong.

So, I think it's worth impressing on people that a computer is a device (made up of processor(s), RAM, hard drive, display, keyboard, mouse, ...) which runs software (by loading it from the hard drive into RAM and then accessing the RAM with the processor). That's what a computer IS. The web page you see is the result of specific programs the computer is running. The virus eating 4 years of baby pictures is just another program and your computer shouldn't be expected to know the difference.

Re:a computer is not an appliance

[deque_alpha]

Someone mod the parent up, I don't have any points...

In my family...

[Vickor]

In my family, being computer literate means having my phone number in their address book...sigh...

not unreasonable

[zogger]

It is not hard to identify and differentiate between the most obvious and modularized basic hardware components of a computer system and the basic layout of arch-operating system-application programs. I mean, c'mon. That should be a bare minimum for anyone to be called a working computer user, at least get you to basic learner level. After that might come basic internet useage do's and don'ts.

    I would not even come close to trusting a professional delivery driver if they couldn't identify the engine as opposed to the starter or the oil filter, or who couldn't explain the difference between a turn signal and the air conditioning knob. I wouldn't trust ANY driver who couldn't grok the difference between a steering wheel and the wheels on the road. Yet with computers we give users a free skate on learning any *basic* fundamentals, then wonder why they get stuck so often and get hosed using the web. They get turned loose with a complex machine and told "good luck!"

    What happens is they are SO ignorant of the basics that even trying to do rudimentary help and tech support(friends/family/professional) with them becomes ludicrous, when they confuse the monitor with the computer for instance. I have seen that, someone pointing at the monitor calling it the computer. what they thought that box sitting next to it was I do not know. "How much RAM do you have?" "I have a pentium, says so right on the box!" UN-acceptable. Shows not even one single hour in self discipline and even trying to understand something like that. It is NOT a toaster and shouldn't be sold or used like it is a toaster, and we shouldn't encourage by quiet acceptance that level of ignorance. Note, I didn't say stupidity, I said self imposed ignorance..

    We SHOULD insist people learn the raw basics, especially if they are in a position of being PAID to "use" a computer, or if they insist on involving others constantly to "help them" with various trivial small problems..

  I don't know exactly how to go about this, but having tutorials built into consumer operating systems would be a good first step. First boot (just another example of a possibility), you sit through an interactive explanation of how to use what is sitting in front of you, what the components are, how to use the menu, etc, etc,. Something like that could help, and use lotsa pictures. I bet a lot of people would actually appreciate it, most folks want to be independent and to use what they have, but we have to recognize that to a lot of people it is overwhelming, everything they use is new and complex to them, so it has to be put to them in easy to understand chunks.

Re:not unreasonable

[Anonymous Coward]

It is not hard to identify and differentiate between the most obvious and modularized basic hardware components of a computer system and the basic layout of arch-operating system-application programs. I mean, c'mon. That should be a bare minimum for anyone to be called a working computer user, at least get you to basic learner level.

These days those lines aren't as clear as they once were. Hardware, Firmware, OS, and Software are difficult for many to distinguish in many cases... and, most users don't need to care about the first three.

I would not even come close to trusting a professional delivery driver if they couldn't identify the engine as opposed to the starter or the oil filter, or who couldn't explain the difference between a turn signal and the air conditioning knob. I wouldn't trust ANY driver who couldn't grok the difference between a steering wheel and the wheels on the road. Yet with computers we give users a free skate on learning any *basic* fundamentals, then wonder why they get stuck so often and get hosed using the web. They get turned loose with a complex machine and told "good luck!"

There is a huge difference here. A delivery driver is responsible for a several-ton machine, which in a bad situation could cost lives. Mom & Dad behind a PC keyboard, on the other hand, risk nothing more than the contents of their hard drive. This is why a state-issued license (and tests, etc) is required to operate a vehicle, while anyone can operate a PC.

Granted, not every driver needs to know the internal workings of their vehicle. But cars are built under strict regulations, follow standards, etc -- and you can't simply download a program from a third party that might change the way your car operates.

A PC however does allow this; you can install software that might change the basic operation of the system, possibly without your knowledge. This is not allowed on automobiles because of the dangers involved. On a PC, however, installing third-party software can only hurt yourself in most cases.

Re:not unreasonable

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes you can have a tutorial, Microsoft included one on first boot with windows xp, my grandfather has had his pc for 8 months now, every time he turns it on he sees the tutorial pop up, he listens and follows the whole thing, and then closes it, he just dosent get how to disable something like this. You can NOT ask OS manufacturers to do pre emptive tech suport on a massive level.... What you can do though is teach people to think, it has nothing to do with computers, they are just the place where the problem is most blatant. Try to explain to someone over the age of 60 why his tv no longer has an antena on top... Because now you have a cable in the wall that brings you the signal, Whats a signal? *sigh*

The best way I can put it is, if you want to ride a bike, get on it and start riding, you will fall down a bunch of times but in the end you will learn, or you will die, either way the world is happy and your son is not considering puting you in a mental home vs a retirement home.

Re:not unreasonable

[sfe_software]

There is a huge difference here. A delivery driver is responsible for a several-ton machine, which in a bad situation could cost lives. Mom & Dad behind a PC keyboard, on the other hand, risk nothing more than the contents of their hard drive. This is why a state-issued license (and tests, etc) is required to operate a vehicle, while anyone can operate a PC.

Also note that there are very different requirements (in most states) for operating a standard vehicle, and operating a commercial vehicle. In Indiana, anyway, a commercial license requires some knowledge of the vehicle (inspecting each axle, knowing the allowed per-axel weight, etc). So a commercial vehicle (such as the delivery truck referenced in the grand-parent) has a higher potential risk, it also carries a heavier responsibility with the government than a passenger vehicle does.

In all I agree with the parent. A computer requires some knowledge, but this isn't enforced because the user only endangers themselves. A driver holds some responsibility, and is required a basic level of knowledge. A commercial driver holds more responsibility, and therefore is required to have a higher level of knowledge.

What is "Computer literacy"

[jmorris42]

I define "computer literacy" as I would any other use of the word "literacy". A person who can listen or read a language but can't express an original thought in it isn't considered 'literate'. Yes, I mean programming is required to be considered computer literate. Computers are nothing more than a decoder for instructions, if all you can do is cause it to play back someone else's stored commands you are a passive user in exactly the same way as a child sticking Barney videos into the VCR in their bedroom.

Yes, many people (especially in the uneducated nations of today's modern Western world) might be able to live a productive life only knowing how to operate a web browser but 'computer literate' they ain't. You can make exactly the same observation about someone who can't write a coherent paragraph, they too can often live a productive life in the lower classes of society, but illiteracy kills off most chances to better oneself.

And I can already hear some witless wonder getting ready to analogize about people not needing to be mechanics to use a car, blah blah. No everyone doesn't need to be able to strip an engine down but they should know where all the major parts are, the basic theory of operation, common failure modes, make a few emergency fixes, etc. You might not be able to write an office suite from scratch but you should be able to write a spreadsheet macro, a simple shell script or be able to at least have a shot at fixing a bug in a larger program that is really annoying you.

Re:What is "Computer literacy"

[dalroth5]

"...you are a passive user in exactly the same way as a child sticking Barney videos into the VCR in their bedroom."

YES, THAT'S WHAT WE WANT!!!

Make it EXACTLY like that. And please hurry up.

"Literacy"

[Anonymous Coward]

Mastery of Emacs. Competency in Common Lisp optional.

Use AND Maintenance?

[Cainjustcain]

I think use is the key determinant. If you can read a book you are literate. If you can email, surf the web, and use a word processor you are computer literate. But shouldn't maintaining your computer be a factor as well? How many people do you know who can use a computer for the above tasks, but the slightest hiccup sends them dialing your number? Are they computer literate?

Another Stupid Question With No Clear Answer...

[Anonymous Coward]

that bypassed the /. editors somehow.

We're really scraping the bottom of the barrel these days. Why don't the /. editors accept the fact that we're in the IT doldrum, at least for the summer: there will be little news of interest and the economy is slowing. Just accept it and only post excellent questions and articles.

I'm not literate... at polka!

[sedyn]

To extend upon your example:

I should know what ingrediants go in the pot before I throw food in. Meaning that there is a level of abstraction (I don't need to understand the chemical reactions, nor the mechanics of the stove, nor do I have to invent the recipe, I just need to follow a set path). I have cooked food, but would I call myself a chef? Likewise, I have created chemical reactions, am I a chemist? Food preperation is but one step in the overall process.

But my dependence on cooking is because eating is essential. Eating is the end result that you seem to allude to as being literate. And I must disagree with you.

Let us say that I have created a virtual typewriter. And a person becomes a master of it. Their productivity is above average. They also know how to use a suite of lesser programs to accomplish various goals. But all they know about a computer is how to point and click at the icons on their desktop and manipulate the programs suggested earlier. I ask what do they know of computers? They only know self-serving, non computer aspects, but nothing of the underlying structure, on any level. They are literate, but not of computers.

I propose that computer literacy has nothing to do with the "end product" (user-apps), but with the tools surrounding those applications. This is debatable, but I'd like to tink that someone who knows how to use word, excel, etc. isn't considered more computer-literate than I am (I am a programmer for god's sake!). What I know is a completely different subject, and I will argue that my knowledge is far more intrinsic to computers. And it stands to reason that a phrase like "literate" in the ways of computers, would be more applicable to a programmer than a user. So, if we must determine which student of the subjects in question obtain the title of "computer-literate" I would argue that my fellow programmers have much more attachment and a right to it. The odd part would be arguing who is more computer literate, programmers or admins (builders vs. power-users).

The previous paragraph is really just trying to give and take implicit meaning from the term. Which isn't that valid an activity in English. (Free as in Freedom anyone? That phrase is horrible at best.)

I'm not very good at cooking, nor do I know anything about how to make/repair an automobile. So obviously I'm no chef or engineer/mechanic. I would consider my operation of a vehicle and cooking abilities around "functionally retarded" which I would define as an effective antonym for literate. Thus, a functionally retarded computer user is one who can operate the machine, but very poorly (if possible) and has no grasp of how it works, and therefore how to operate it properly. Someone who has mastered the previously mentioned applications may be of this status, or might be completely computer literate. I re-iterate that the two are pretty much mutually exclusive. I believe that upon re-examination, you're arguing that it should be possible to have functionally retarded people. Which isn't really the discussion at hand.

I say all of this because the term "literate" is somewhat of a dodge. It's like the difference between being able to speak a language fluently, at a conversation level, or barely to not at all. The first and last are easy to measure (digital), and results will be agreed upon. To determine the middle is much more complex (analogue). For example, how does someone fit in who knows all the words in a language, but has no grasp of sentence structure? Their ability to speak will be poor, but will have a decent chance of understanding what others say (I know that with French and even English I can listen or read much easier than speak or write because I cannot actively utilize words that are in my vocabulary)

This has become a rant, but my point is that the term literate becomes too vague, and the ability to quantify results and the quality of their merits becomes impossible.

Also, in retrospect, the term functionally retarded works quite well in this context, I believe I will have to use it again at a later date.

Re:Interaction, information organisation, networki

[Harinezumi]

Sounds good, though I'd also add basic security to the list. Specifically installing critical updates, not opening suspicious attachments, not installing spyware, and not replying to spam.

KnowIT

[)parenthesis(]

I work at a university, and we recently came up with a "KnowIT" program. This program teaches digital literacy (defined as "helping students learn how to use multiple computer tools effectively), and has a specific set of goals:

GOAL 1: Students will be able to recognize, articulate, and characterize what they need to know as they approach a problem, project, writing assignment or other research task.

GOAL 2: Students will be able to access needed information effectively and efficiently independent of form or format.

GOAL 3: Students will be able to evaluate information and information sources critically.

GOAL 4: Students will be able to use information effectively to accomplish a specific purpose as well as to retain selected information as part of their accumulated knowledge.

GOAL 5: Students will be able to manage and organize information effectively and efficiently using information technologies.

GOAL 6: Students will be able to produce and create structured electronic documents that successfully express their ideas for a specific audience and situation.

GOAL 7: Students will be able to manipulate and use qualitative and quantitative data and aural and visual information using information technologies.

GOAL 8: Students will be able to collaborate appropriately and effectively using information technologies.

GOAL 9: Students will be able to successfully communicate produced content using information technologies.

GOAL 10: Students will be able to participate as informed members of the academy who understand major legal, economic, social, ethical, privacy, and security issues related to information technologies.

More info: http://www.colorado.edu/knowit

While this is specifically geared towards university-level students, it is just as easily applicable to any computer-using group.

Truely literate

[Anonymous Coward]

1- Become computer literate
2- Learn that everything is slightly more valid if prefixed with "true" or "truely".

Bah...

[random_amber]

42696E61727920697320666F72206C6F736572732E20486578 61646563696D616C2069732077686572652069742773206174 21

Random_Amber

What Should One Know to be Computer Literate

[felix rayman]

Non-deterministic Turing machines.

Everything else is just implementation details.

Re: What Should One Know to be Computer Literate

[klang]

Oh, man .. that's .. wow

Can't

[XanC]

The real computer literate person would know that once a system has been owned, it should never be trusted again.

If you can do this .....

[sp3000]

if you can do these ...

1. type - OMG WTF LOL ...

2. create - your own myspace page

... you are computer literate ...

(what else is there)!!

It's simple

[Khashishi]

A person needs to know enough to RTFM.

Re:It's simple

[Anonymous Coward]

RTFM is old School. Now it is all GFE!

What I consider to be computer literacy

[gujo-odori]

What do I consider to be computer literacy?

A good set of the basic skills others have mentioned, and one other key skill:

The ability to solve, or at least attempt to solve, most problems by yourself. That is, if something's wrong, you can describe the problem well enough to put some relevant search terms into Google and find some likely answers. The extent of your problem solving skills should not be asking the sysadmin.

I've met countless people who were very good at using a category of application software - Photoshop wizards, spreadsheet aces, etc., who could only use a computer as long as it was functioning normally. If there was even the slightest abnormality, they were stuck. IMO, they were not computer literate, because they understood only the applications they used; they did not understand computers.

Now *that* is a definition of computer literacy: you have a working understanding of computers and the OS you use and can solve problems when something is wrong.

Re:What I consider to be computer literacy

[Durinthal]

I agree completely. To me, being knowledgable isn't necessarily knowing every minor function available and every error that can happen, but rather knowing how to find that information if necessary. The more you already know (have cached in memory, so to speak) the better, but it's still founded on that principle.

Ercegovac and Gajski

[Anonymous Coward]

To be a computer literate, one must read their books and implement all exercices in VHDL.

Oh what painful memories...

[Nick Driver]

...that brings back. Quarterdeck's QEMM was quite the lifesaver back in those olden days.

Re:Oh what painful memories...

[fishbowl]

>...that brings back. Quarterdeck's QEMM was quite the lifesaver back in those olden days.

Windows was a GIANT step backwards from DesqView, but fortunately relief came quickly in the form of free unixes and life has been good ever since, hardware makers be damned.

UK

[Cyram]

The UK has a set curriculum to teach computer literacy which is actually defined as not just how to use computers but more about how to handle information, improving your work, and audience.

There's more here:
http://www.standards.dfes.gov.uk/keystage3/respub/ ictframework/yearly_teaching_objectives/

In a nutshell; System Security

[Anonymous Coward]

To be truly good at System Security you need to have a very deep understanding of every discipline within computer science. You need to know networking, OS architecture, programming, information security, program analysis, debugging, and even reverse engineering. The problem is that there is simply too much to know without spending a whole life time trying to satisfy your own curiosity, otherwise you will never get there. If you have that insatiable desire to know and understand how everything works then that may be the path to take. On the other hand, if you are just looking for a quick buck then please go find another vocation.

Ordinary literacy would be a good start

[Anonymous Coward]

Which is a bit much to ask of schools today.

Term is Badly Abused

[Anonymous Coward]

The term as it is bandied about is badly abused. The computer should be literate, that is, the goal of developers, whether it's Microsoft, Apple, KDE, GNOME, or students writing a program for a class, should be to have an interface as self-explanatory, as clear, as easy to use as possible. The computer should appear literate in the natural language of the user. People should not have to adapt themselves to computers.

Computing power has come a long, long way from where "computer literacy" meant everyone should learn to program, so you could write your own text editor (this was before PC's were powerful run to use word processors) in something like Pascal or logo (text editing with turtles!).

Actually, my observation has been that students who are literate and somewhat numerate have less problems with computers than someone who has taken a computer literacy class, but can't spell, construct a paragraph, or solve simple arithmetic problems.

KISS...

[mrfatmann]

Ok, Maybe this is a bit bozo, BUT IMHO computer literacy begins with save, organize and (most importantly) archive files.

If you're on a GUI app you have a backup to CD-ROM program or tape drive. You know how to find the files you need to keep (system preferences, email databases, HTML bookmark files, etc.). If you're using a text-based interface you can copy files and keep a copy of the original in the event you flub.

Computers are about data you generate from other applications. Skills to save your work product is the most valueable first lesson--no matter what type of system you're on.

I'm literate...

[CarnivorousCoder]

I read playboy.com for the articles. Really!

The words we use

[dwater]

re: memory vs hard drive

As is often the case[1], the problem is more to do with the words we use. Perhaps 'short-term' and 'long-term' would be better - even if it's just to explain the difference.

[1] Esp. in the open source world - what the heck is 'firefox' anyway? Microsoft have very much 'got it right' in this respect, IMO.

Re:The words we use

[0123456789]

Esp. in the open source world - what the heck is 'firefox' anyway? Microsoft have very much 'got it right' in this respect, IMO.

Equally, what the heck is 'outlook'?

Re:The words we use

[dwater]

(IMO) it's a good name for a product that shows you what you'll be doing in the near future.

Re:The words we use

[Phroggy]

...Excel, PowerPoint...

This

[baudbarf]

It's important to know how to patch paper tape.

It's been said before but I'll say it again

[Anonymous Coward]

Understanding what file systems and files are. It's not that difficult and it makes a big difference in moving a user's perception of a computer away from 'magic box' to machine. A lot of people seem to switch off and resist learning as soon as you try to explain it though...

_CAN_ you learn?

[bagawk]

I want to say you should be able to learn on your own and try to learn. I often see people that do not even try to do something they do not know how without asking someone. Once you learn to look around and try to learn things, you will become quite wise.

Indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

I was working with a person who knew MS Office really well. So well in fact that I finally understood why MS Office is superior.

Being a unix system programmer, I feel quite computer literate. However, even though I know lots of hardware and programming technicalities, I know that users with a different set of knowledge from mine can be as or more productive in their environment as I am in my own.

The answer is obvious

[Schraegstrichpunkt]

To be computer literate, one must know how to read computers.

Re:The answer is obvious

[gEvil (beta)]

To be computer literate, one must know how to read computers.

You joke, but there's actually a bit of truth to it. Look at the number of people here saying things like "Read the dialog box and don't blindly click OK."

And abilities that carry

[cgenman]

I'd add in a few basic skills to consider someone computer literate.

Program agnosticism: They should know roughly how chat programs work. This doesn't mean AIM, this means that they know enough that they can walk up to any chat system and make it do useful things. Same thing for e-mail clients. Same thing for Browsers. You should be able to give them a laptop loaded up with Windows or Knoppix or SkyOS, and they should be able to quickly muddle their way over to myspace.com.

Hardware knowledge: This is your power supply. When it breaks, things tend to smoke. This is a hard drive. When it breaks, it makes a "click click click Screeeeech!" noise. This is your graphics card. Also known as the hole you'll be pouring your money into for the rest of your life. I'm not saying everyone should have memorised the jumper settings on their motherboard. But they shouldn't be afraid to open the thing up and look or make changes.

Some Scripting: I don't care what scripting language. I don't care if you're talking Perl, Word macros, applescript, AutoHotKey, a command line script, an e-mail filter, or Java. If they can write things in a scripting language, even a completely visual handholding one, they're good. You don't need to fully program or compile. You don't even need to be that great at it. You just need to be able to think about the problem in terms of "how do I tell this computer how to do something."

Re:And abilities that carry

[Sneaky G]

You should be able to give them a laptop loaded up with Windows or Knoppix or SkyOS, and they should be able to quickly muddle their way over to myspace.com.

...and bonus points to the user who muddles his way over to Slashdot.

Re:And abilities that carry

[Kluenitou]

From Merriam Webster's Dictionary:

literate - 1 a : EDUCATED, CULTURED b : able to read and write 2 a : versed in literature or creative writing : LITERARY b : LUCID, POLISHED c : having knowledge or competence

While I agree the skills you list are really good ones to have and that everyone should possess them, I think it is far beyond what should be required of literacy. As defined, literacy is simply the ability to read and write. This implies at the most basic level. It doesn't include understanding metaphors and hyperboles, it doesn't include many things that we seem to think the average person in this world should understand in order to be able to survive, it is the bare minimum they need to know to get by. If you were to come upon someone who was considered only literate in the English language, they would probably be able to read and write at the level of a fifth grader. Clearly not the most ideal for the world, but they would likely be able to read a shopping list or basic forms required for living. Likewise, computer literacy should simply include the basics. While I applaud your desire for everyone to know scripting, the fact of the matter is that very few computer users percentage wise know/understand how to do it and I think it is above and beyond what should be required to consider someone computer literate. My mother for example. She is able to send/receive email, type at a reasonable pace, browse the web and purchase things online, etc. and I would consider her computer literate--she is able to get by in her daily routine with the use of the computer and not call me every 2 seconds confused about everything. She could never in a million years start to get her head around writing a script in Perl. For God's sake it's kind of a bitch for me to get something like REGEXs right the first time and I'm a pretty seasoned programmer. I can't even imagine trying to explain those bad boys to my Mom or any "average" computer user for that matter.

I think computer literacy is much simpler and basic than you are making it out to be.

Re:And abilities that carry

[Anonymous Coward]

Whoa... scripting? We are talking about literacy, IE something kids and grandmothers should be able to acheive. Scripting requires a great deal of knowledge about how to use a computer before you can start taking those pieces together to create greater functionality. Its going to be tough to teach someone who is struggling to remember the ls command how to grep that output and pipe it to wc -l to see how many recipes she has with "pie" or whatever in the title.

I think the general definition of literacy is simple. They should know how to operate the computer on a day to day basis well enough that they can learn or get help on their own. For any OS, this means starting/stopping the computer, running programs, installing programs, understanding what the file system is, how it is set up and how to navigate it. How to change basic usability settings like mouse sensitivity, UI colors, wallpaper, etc. How and where to acquire new software. How to get on and navigate the internet, how to spot spam/phishing sites. These are the basics, and the details of how to do these tasks are OS specific.

On top of this though, to be "literate" you really have to know how to use the basic functionality of common software packages such as email programs, web browsers, word processors, etc.

NO ONE is literate though until they can take the knowledge they have and learn new things though. Case in point- my mother. I told her how to install aim, she sat there with a notepad and wrote down every single step down to what button to select. I told her that she just needed to understand the general process, and that most likely the exact site name and buttons would change. She just gave me a blank stare. I used to encourage her to write down how to do stuff for simple tasks so she could eventually memorize them and start connecting the dots that this stuff is pretty much the same throughout most programs. Instead, she used her cheat sheets as a crutch, and never deviated from them one iota, never connected the dots, she just blindly followed instructions without thinking about what she was doing. This is a woman who has been using computers for over 20 years. Its kind of astounding.

Re:And abilities that carry

[martinultima]

I'm not saying everyone should have memorised the jumper settings on their motherboard.”

Dammit! You mean my entire life so far's been in vain??

Re:And abilities that carry

[panda]

I dunno. I like to highlight definition 2:

From Merriam Webster's Dictionary:

        literate - 1 a : EDUCATED, CULTURED b : able to read and write 2 a : versed in literature or creative writing : LITERARY b : LUCID, POLISHED c : having knowledge or competence


See, that's the definition of literacy that the parent is using. You're just setting the bar lower. ;)

Re:And abilities that carry

[Anonymous Coward]

Let's take your mother for example, and I like your definition (literacy being reading and writing...)

Reading is essentially input processing. Most users are simply reading when they are at their computer. Even what limited communication (output processing, or writing) that they conduct with their machines is trivial, more like a choose your own adventure novel than truly communicating with the electronic personality on your desk...

The typical user is functionally illiterate. Regardless of the ability or lack of ability to read, there is a uniform inability to communicate effectively with their machine. Even the language a user will typically use to describe their problem or frustration. (Why won't it do what I want it to? and a thousand variations on the same....)

That, I believe to be the crux of many user behaviours.

As another analogy, consider those users trying to tour Paris without maybe a half dozen words of French. The same gross behaviours quickly manifest, nervousness, insecurity, confusion, and ultimately frustration. Throw in to the mix the pressing need to find the facilities NOW!, (much like work deadlines which make even a "good" user a nightmare...)

Of course, being an IT guy, standing around a big old pot, holding a big old spoon, I've got to stir...

It would probably help the overall situation a whole lot if IT folk could stop acting like the stereotypical Parisian waiter:
rude, smug, intolerant and impatient.

Re:And abilities that carry

[jp10558]

I think there are some people who just can't do the sort of thinking required to not follow a cheat sheet. I know people who work in an area, and never spend any time learning about the area, and can't read a map.

This means that they memorize the route from home to work and back, to the store and such. But they are the ones who complain about not being able to get to the store when there is construction on the main street because they don't know about the side street 2 blocks down that parallels the main street, and are scared to try and figure out another route.

I can't imagine spending my entire life going to and from work etc as if I was passing through the area on vacation, never knowing anything but the mapquest directions, but there are people who do.

I would imagine a similar issue must lead to the computer users who must use a cribsheet.

What's worse is "object" based instructions don't help these people either. They need 1,2,3 and god help them if something happens that gets them away from 1.

Umm, let's have October already.

[Baloo Ursidae]

Then general idea of networking... not arcane TCP/IP, DHCP, DNS stuff... just the idea that other computers can be accessed by your computer and vice versa

You're forgetting massive biggie: RFC-1855 (Netiquette guidelines), why your email and news readers put the cursor before quoted text, and why you should think critically before using Earthlink's anti-spam. God knows September needs to end already.

Apparently you just need to know ...

[grantm]

... how to overclock.

Classical Literacy or Romantic Literacy?

[PuckDownunder]

Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance... Does one need to understand the forms to appreciate the function or vice versa? Can money buy happiness? In both cases, the answer is, "No, but it helps." Start with a goal: What is it that you want to do? Then recognise that there are parts designed to achieve that goal, and learn how to use those parts. Those parts are connected to other parts, and those other parts are also designed to achieve a goal. Learn how to use those parts, and you will learn about other potential goals. And so on and so on and so on... Of course this is a good general model for gaining 'literacy' in any field. Teach me how to learn, and bugger the fish!

depends on the person's goals, but in general...

[buddyglass]

I'm a "big picture" guy. Most people will never program a computer or design hardware. They will most likely shop for a computer, however, and for software to run on it. They will have to act as their own sysadmin and perform various system tasks. They will use applications like browsers, word processors, firewalls, virus scanners, messaging clients, email clients, etc. Given these tasks, I'd lay out the following goals:

1. Have a basic understanding of PC hardware. What are all the "parts"? What sort of performance attributes do the various parts have? Why would I want one over the other?
2. Have a basic understanding of what software "is", how it works, and how it was created. Know that programmers write source code and that specialized programs called "compilers" turn it into object code, which is then assembled into machine code.
3. Understand what an operating system "is", what services it provides to applications. Know what OS choices exist and what differentiates them.
4. Know how to use a few common apps, and how to administer the user's OS of choice. That includes applying updates, adding new hardware, updating drivers, etc.
5. Know how to practice "safe computing" and not fall prey to malware, phishing scams, etc.

That's all I can think of at the moment.

Continue to ban myspace at school!

[chrisxkelley]

For the LAST time- HTML is NOT a programming language!!!

</senseless_rant>

The True Sign of Computer Literacy

[Da Rabid Duckie]

...is knowing to vote "Cowboy Neal" on everything.

Not really...

[John Whorfin]

Not assemble the car, but have a basic understanding of how it works. Engine, air filter, oil goes in there... water in there.... Do you know how to change a tire?

Yes, I also believe a "normal everyday user" should understand what a "hard drive" is and by pulling it out and looking at one it might help them visualize just what goes on in that big scary box on their desk.

Somebody tagged 'ed'?!

[ggvaidya]

Now that's just CRUEL! :p

History... er

[sammyo]

"3 Know your history. In the beginning, there was the commandline. "

The comand line is actually rather late. Knowing the
existance of punch cards would be worthwhile. Details
like that actually help one to understand where artifacts
such as why 80 character widths are common.

Re:History... er

[drolli]

Punchcards....

what a luxury....

a few switchen on the front panel should do it for all you need.

Re:History... er

[colinrichardday]

But the GP was discussing history, and punchcards predate switches on the front panel.

Re:History... er

[GWTPict]

Gotta love that Jacquard Loom.

Re:History... er

[MelvinSmalls]

Switches...pffft. In my day we used vaccuum tubes and counted 'em out with our fingers how many were lit up or not, then did the math with a sliderule and paper. And we were greatful for it!

Tried and erred

[Troutrooper]

A few people have mentioned computer literacy as being able to use computers to complete an abstract task, a notion I heartily agree with. A computer is a tool when reduced and abstracted. To be considered literate/adept/handy with a tool, one must know when to employ it and how to use it properly. To that end, I would say there are some basic tasks and concepts that people should know if they wish to be considered computer literate.

• Windows, Mac OS, and Unix are different operating systems and function in different ways.
• How to create, print, and save a word processing document.
• How to send an email with an attachment.
• How to surf the web safely and how to find information on the web.
• How to safely tinker with applications and hardware (they're called backups).
• Know when and whom to ask for help.
• How to maintain a Windows machine (or a Mac or a Unix box, depending on the type of computer the person uses most often).
• Telecommunication and computer security basics (no more pwd='password').
• How to install and use a keyboard, mouse, printer, and modem.
• How to use and troublshoot software and hardware required for one's job.

I'm sure I'm missing other concepts, but that list will suffice. Probably 90-95% of what the average computer user does falls into that list. I don't need to be Harold Bloom to consider myself book literate, nor do I need to be the world's greatest programmer to consider myself computer literate.

The idea of learning a computer through trial-and-error has merit, but many people don't know how to do it safely or thoroughly. The vast majority of Slashdotters are computer literate--if not computer experts--and thus know how to safely and thoroughly experiment with new computer soft/hardware. Computer beginners, however, may find themselves doing something irrevocable (like trying to uninstall IE in XP), and so should stick to learning basic processes until they are more familiar with the computer.

not just for communication

[danbrz]

what ever happened t oproblem solving? computations that would take a human 100 years?

Re:not just for communication

[fishbowl]

We used computers to solve all of those, plucked the low hanging fruit, and then hit the wall when we realized the *really* interesting problems were those that would take computers trillions of years to solve...

Computers are actually hindering education

[dtjohnson]

When desktop computers first became affordable to school districts, they were supposed to be essential education tools. The student was supposed to sit down at the computer and have it be a patient tutor that would lead him past the difficulties he might be having as he pointed and clicked his way through powerful educational software. Well, a very small part of that might still be true but most of what kids do with computers in school now is Googling to 'research' the topic du jour and then powerpointing up what they find. The result of this 'education' is that kids never crack a book in the library, rely on superficial, shallow information that is often incorrect, have weak writing skills, and don't think beyond the depth of a powerpoint bullet point. High school students from 20 years ago got a much better education than current high school students are getting. The only thing current high school students would beat them on is powerpoint and Word art skills.

Re:Computers are actually hindering education

[jawtheshark]

I wish I had modpoints. Bravo!

Re:Computers are actually hindering education

[Ricin]

+10, perceptive.

What I mean with that is not particularly insightful, rather observing the obvious while (almost) no one else seems to. Good one.

Re:Computers are actually hindering education

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes! For schools, 'computer literacy' means 'software literacy' as in 'what menu to click to find feature xyz.' Schools don't teach kids anything useful about computers such as what is a file, what is a file name, what is a file system, or what is 'digital' data. Schools should teach kids those things as well as some simple programming with something like Java so that kids would understand what a computer program is in the first place. If they did that and got rid of the powerpoint, they would be better off.

Re:Computers are actually hindering education

[yuri benjamin]

This is probably the most insightful and perceptive comment under this article.
Finally - someone who Understands.

Computer Illiteracy

[Bent Mind]

Strangely enough, at least for myself, I'd have to say it's easier to define computer illiteracy. You know, when you think to yourself "I wish they taught basic computer literacy in schools".

Honestly, the basics haven't changed since the GUI became commonplace. Here are a couple of things that are good to know:

• The monitor is part of the computer, not the computer. It took my Mother ages to understand that turning the monitor off didn't turn the computer off.
• Icons initiate actions. I have a user at work who thought all those little pictures were just to make the screen look interesting.
• Automate repetition. Same user as above, he still doesn't understand cut and paste.
• Remember where you saved that file. "I can't find my file" still seems to be the most common complaint.

From there you can break it down into more specific areas. For example, Internet, Office, Technical, etc. I know a lot of people consider Internet to be part of the basics. However, it is possible to be computer literate without knowing anything about the Internet. A friend of mine is a retired programmer. He definitely knows his way around his system. He has also taught me a thing or two when it comes to writing a script. However, he is not interested in the Internet. I'd hardly call him illiterate. I've also known a few of engineers that could do some truly amazing things in CAD. However, they don't have a clue when it comes to word processing.

Just a final thought, stay away from anything vendor specific. I took computer information systems in high school and college. Back then the basics were WordPerfect, dBase, and Lotus. After receiving my Associate, I realized that it was all a waste. Everyone wanted Microsoft. I wonder what they will want when my daughter graduates.

How I know.

[Anonymous Coward]

Typical day at the office.

User : I lost all my data files, and was wondering ummm, if you could recover them for me.

Me : *begins basic troubleshooting, after a few dead ends decides to ask the million dollar question*

Me : What folder were your data files held?

User : Right there. *pointing at the recycle bin*

Me : Where? *in awe*

User : Right there in that trash can folder, it's where I keep all my important temporary files.

Me : *walks slowly to the back of said users computer, unplugs it, and removes it from his desk*

User : Where are you going with my computer?

Me : Sorry sir, I need to take it back to my shop for further testing.

Users like this should never be allowed the right to have a computer at their desk.

Ever.

At a minimum, UNITS!

[Mr Z]

Somedays, I feel like punching in the nose the next person I hear say "My computer has five-twelve RAM and, uhm, sixty hard drive."

If you can't sort out kilobytes, megabytes and gigabytes, you're not computer literate. And if you insist on talking about kibibytes, mebibytes or gibibytes, you're either a snot-nosed elitist/inflexible pedant (if you live here in the USA), or you're outside the USA and may not even speak English as a first language. If you're the former, I just shake my head, sigh, and make sure not to bump into you again. If you're the latter, well, maybe you and I can sit over a beer (or beverage of your choice), and I can explain to you why those units will never catch on here, except for among those who might memorize train schedules and catalog individual trains' appearances, if they happened to live a country where that makes sense.

--Joe

Re:At a minimum, UNITS!

[Mr Z]

Ugh, my pedantic side takes over... I said "if they happened to live a country where that makes sense." GAH. Had I sufficiently edited my post, that would have read "if they instead were in a country where that made sense to do." There are probably other mechanical errors in that post. I'll stop now before I'm further behind. :-)

--Joe

Re:Interaction, information organisation, networki

[anagama]

Search is the uber-killer app.

I'm old enough to have used DR-DOS, Geoworks, and BBSs (the real kind you dialed into with a modem). I remember when Delphi started offering internet access (Delphi was solely text based -- still got porn just fine (thank you uudecode)). But I have trouble remembering what a pain it was to gather information -- to actually have to drive a long way to find a good library.

Anyway, you are absolutely correct: internet search rocks. The amount of information available on an immediate basis just blows my mind.

Analogy

[Brandybuck]

Think of an analogy to math. Just because you know how to use a calculator doesn't mean you know arithmetic. Or what about an analogy to language. Just because you know how to speak doesn't mean you know jack about how to structure a sentence.

Merely knowing how to use Outlook is insufficient for computer literacy. You also need to know the basic concepts behind email: what is an email address, the difference between the client and the server, the basic netiquette of not top posting, how to recognize spam and scams, etc, etc. Do you know what a file is? A directory? Can you navigate a directory hierarchy? Do you know what a file system is?

Clicking buttons on a GUI is not computer literacy, no matter what Bill Gates says.

OBVIOUSLY...

[Dj Suppai Saru]

Being computer literate means being able to post comments on myspace! omg lol!

Why stop there?

[grahamsz]

In theory I can build a transistor from silicon, a logic gate from those transistors, a cpu from those gates, and from there build an OS and software to run on it.

In practise it would take me a lot more studying to actually pull it all together, as I do Java programming in my professional life. But I find that knowing the levels below where I work give me a definite advantage.

Repeat After Me: DETERMINISM

[menace3society]

There is only one thing you need to know in order to be computer literate, but it seems to be the stumbling block for most people. You must understand that, with the exception of genuine hardware bugs, the computer is a 100% deterministic machine. It does only, and exactly, what it is told to do. Not what you want it to do. Not what is sensible or reasonable or convenient or beautiful or ethical or any of those things. It obeys without fail the instructions conveyed to it in machine code, and if those instructions tell it to erase your data or curse at your mother or set the CPU on fire, then by God that is what will happen.

The corollary to this is that if you understand how to communicate with the computer, how to speak its language, you can do anything.

Re:Repeat After Me: DETERMINISM

[Riktov]

It obeys without fail the instructions conveyed to it in machine code, and if those instructions tell it to erase your data or curse at your mother or set the CPU on fire, then by God that is what will happen.

Wait a minute, you just said it's 100% deterministic. God doesn't come into play at all.

Re:Repeat After Me: DETERMINISM

[Rothron the Wise]

The computer is a 100% deterministic machine.

Try telling that to anyone using Microsoft Word. The way it tries to guess what I want to do and how it changes behavior when I backspace to remove Word's mistaken guesses and type the same thing again, it does something else is seriously disturbing.

Trying to trick Word into doing what it is you want is taxing and will eventually condition the user into doing seemingly random, illogical, and unintuitive choices which eventually lead you to what you want. Kinda like running a maze trying to find the cheese.

Most casual users are exposed to Word. You cannot blame them for becoming a bit confused. The computer is deterministic, but the software might not be.

Re:Repeat After Me: DETERMINISM

[menace3society]

Nobody asked about software literacy. Besides, that's an easy solution too: write your own. In assembler. Then, you know exactly what the software does because you wrote out all the instructions.

Just Plain Literacy

[miyako]

Ok, forgive me for standing on a soapbox, but when I see people talking about computer literacy, I wonder why they don't focus on just plain literacy.
I am a (recent) product of the US educational system, and I still find the statistics on illiteracy and functional illiteracy in the US staggering. Without going into the hows and whys of the problem with illiteracy in the US, I think that I can say that it is a problem that needs to be solved before it is reasonable to expect computer literacy.
I think that anyone who has ever worked in tech support, or tried to help people on IRC, or who have any relatives at all has been forced to ask themselves at least once "Can't these people even read a $favorite_curse_word message box". I think that, in at least some cases, the answer is "no". Though the everyday user might come into contact with some computer jargon in their regular usage, I would suspect that it is much more common that the writing in various bits of documentation, error messages, etc. are above the reading level of the average highschool graduage (and perhaps a few college graduates as well).
I would be interested to see someone do a study on the reading level of various bits of documentation (perhaps a comparison between some *nix man pages, OS X and Windows help, and the average reading level of articles on a few common sites that contain documentation).
Aside from people being able to read, I think that one of the major aspects of computer literacy is teaching people to read things that pop up on the screen. I think that many people see error messages, etc. and just assume that it will be above their heads and make no attempt to understand it.

Dog software and cat software

[Quiberon]

One should know how to use 'dog software' (in the UK, to own a dog, you have to buy a dog licence). And 'cat software' (there is no such thing as a cat licence, cats are free). And 'no software' (pencil and paper)

Re:Dog software and cat software

[smellystudent]

Dog licence?? Haven't needed one of those for many many years.

... and cross-platform

[wysiwia]

File Edit Blah Blah Blah Help

CTRL X
CTRL C
CTRL V

CTRL S

Well first of all OpenSource developers should code alike. Here http://wyoguide.sf.net/, any developer can see how it canbe done correctly, how it can be done efficiently on any platform.

O. Wyss

DWIM

[Ranger]

Should we adapt to the computer or should we adapt the computer to us? I've never understood the term computer literate. It's not a fucking book. We don't talk about people being telephone literate, VCR literate, car literate, or toaster literate. Perhaps computer savvy? At one point computer 'literate' meant knowing how to use assembly language, punch cards, and paper tape. The command line prompt was a big improvement. Now we have GUI's, mice, and touch screens. Eventually they'll respond to voice commands and project images in 3D. Computers are a moving target. We have to design them to not only be user friendly but abuser friendly. Does computer literate mean knowing how to use a flash drive or swapping out a hard drive, formatting and installling the OS? Or does it mean knowing how to order a pizza or download a song from a website to a computer to your MP3 player?

Personally, I think every computer should come with a DWIM button (Do What I Mean) and it should be placed right next to the Any key. And yes, all I read was the blurb. It's not worth the effort to go and read the linked story.

My list

[Michael Woodhams]

* Basic hardware - e.g. the difference between RAM, hard drive, optical disk. Open a computer and talk to them about the main bits.
* OS - what does an OS do, why are there many of them (including versions of Windows), what is and is not compatable between OSs. Admin and user accounts.
* Upgrades. How to install new software or (simple) hardware. How does your OS react when it detects new hardware.
* Filesystems - how to use folders, distinction between data and application, how the OS knows which application to use on which file. Backup. What to do when you run out of disk space.
* Network - ways of connecting your computer (modems, ethernet, wireless), configuring to connect to your ISP, using network resources (printers, non-local disk)
* Malware and scams. Virus protection and recovery, trojan avoidance, phishing, rich Nigerian widows.
* Major internet resouces - Google, Wikipedia etc. Search engine technique.
* E-mail netequette. (Don't send a 50Mb file to dial-up user. Don't propagate bogus virus warnings. Craig Sherman has enough postcards.)
* The most basic software packages - e-mail, browser, word processor, possibly calendar, spreadsheet, presentation, media player (depending on the audience.)

Washing Machine Computer

[TwilightSentry]

Your washing machine has a computer in it.

Nah, mine just has a geared timer (exposed to the user as a knob) which rotates as the machine runs. There are little metal bumps on the back; as the timer rotates they come into contact with different wires behind the timer, completing circuits at different times for, say, 'fill tank with water' and 'spin cycle.'

This thing is ~25 years old, before EVERYTHING was run with a microcontroller; I would surmise that newer machines would probably use one. My old machines hold up pretty well, though. Hopefully, when they quit, we'll have washing machines that run Linux.

I think something like the timer was also used to sequence instructions on Zuse's Z3...

Now I can leave, happy in the knowledge that I've overanalyzed a sarcastic remark!

Wow, no mention of Google?

[Zaphod2016]

I'm suprised guys. Really, I am.

These days a "computer literate" person needs a solid understanding of the Internet. Safety issues aside, everyone needs to understand:

• Email: web based or client software, they have options.

• Searching: from Google to Lexis Nexis they can find anything, if they know where to look.

• Netiquette: just the BASICS PLEASE =) =) n0tHiNg Prnl it jst hrtz my @y@z!!

What does you expect when ...

[wysiwia]

Microsoft has a market share of above 90%? It's no wonder that computer illiterate people think it synonym with computer understanding. Most people don't see a computer as a gadget but as a tool which helps them doing their tasks. People want to write simple letters, sometimes a full resume or to look up some information or schedules in the internet or maybe get some music or play a game. People don't want to install a system or an application and they definitely don't want to work around annoyances and bugs. So as long as Microsoft cares for these people but none of the OpenSource developers, computer literacy is synonym with knowing Microsoft.

To counter this one way behavior I've created wyoGuide (http://wyoguide.sf.net/). It just shows to developers how to code their applications so all these people can use and like them. But it only makes a sense if developers make wyoGuide conformant applications and users ask for wyoGuide conformant applications.

O. Wyss

Teaching computer literacy != training secretaries

[StarkRG]

or at least it shouldn't.

Being able to transcribe or copy text should not be part of the test. This is something I don't do very fast (hence my extremely low typing rate for most typing tests), however I can type much faster if it's something I'm making up on the spot. In the typing tests we were given the idea was that you type each letter as you see it, don't try and read what you're reading (if that makes sense). This is something I can't do, when I read I digest the information, reform it (as the same thing) and type it, this takes time. Also, I was always 100% correct but slightly slower than the minimum, while the requirement was 30wpm with 5 errors (I was often 28wpm with 0 errors).

The requirement should be the ability to understand computer concepts (what 'print', 'save', 'save as', etc. mean) no matter what program you're in, the general placement of frequently used items ("file -> save", etc.), frequently used keyboard commands ("ctrl/command-s").

Teaching a combination of Mac and Windows should also be in the curriculum, with an option of *nix (both command line and X). Teaching how to be able to distinguish spam and phising from real email should be a no-briner, kinda like sex-ed (which, in my opinion should be a no-brainer, but for some odd reason people don't like it). Simple computer administration should be part (not knowing how to install your printer is about as computer literate as being able to only read dick and jane style books is literate), as is simple security (opening random email attachments is to computer literacy as driving headlong into a pole is being a competent driver).

Personally I think everyone should have at least a basic idea of how things work in order to own/use them. Knowing the basics of an internal combustion engine is not a huge thing to ask (fuel gets inserted, spark goes off, fuel goes boom, shoves cylinder away which turns shaft). Thus knowing a little bit about the internal workings of a computer should also be not too much to ask (this chip has lots of tiny on-off switches which represent zeros and ones, which, in turn, represent data, only one operation can be done by the chip at one time, the operating system does some magic stuff that regulates what's going on and when, etc.).

Now I'm not saying that everyone should be able to put together a computer from spare parts and install an OS from CD (not that it wouldn't hurt), but just the basics should be easy enough.

People should be taught enough (and perhaps JUST enough) to be able to figure the rest out on their own. If people CAN'T figure things out on their own they probably shouldn't be allowed to breed...

Teh real l1t3r4cy

[edeity]

leet speak skillz. The only real measure of computer literacy.

This is an easy one

[Tony]

There is a simple definition of computer literacy: the ability to independently cope with a new situation. For instance, learning MS-Office by wrote is not literacy. Knowing the purpose of a word processor, and using that knowledge to learn a new word processor is literacy.

If a user can't figure out OpenOffice, they ain't word-processor literate.

Just as one can be generally literate in the English language but still not be able to read and comprehend complex material, there are different levels of literacy. I am substantially more literate in computers than most people in my family, for instance.

But, in general, the ability to learn new software based on general understanding is a vital hallmark of literacy.

Re:I'm not literate... at polka!

[sfe_software]

I think I'm on the same page as the parent here, but in a shorter form...

You can be a good driver without knowing how the car works. Likewise one can be "computer literate" without knowing how the computer works internally.

If you know how cars work, and how to work on them, you might be more proficient in their operation. Likewise with computers. Sometimes knowing the internals (and having an understanding) helps to use a device/product on a day-to-day basis. But it isn't required, nor should it be.

To me, "literacy" of anything (computers, cars, language) simply means the ability to utilize the item to get things done. I'm literate in English, eg I can easily communicate using the language. However, I know very little about the origins of the language. Or where it originated. Or why. Nor do I care.

With cars and computers, I do know these things. But unless you're looking for a low-level programmer, or an auto-repair mechanic, literacy usually means the ability to use the technology for a specific person.

In an office environment, computer literacy may mean knowledge of MS Office. In a development environment it usually means more than that.

In short: computer literacy depends on context...

Theory AND Practice

[fishbowl]

Discrete Mathematics. You can take this as far as you care to -- there's no "end" to the process, but if you don't bother learning the basis of the theory of computing, sooner or later you will hit a wall, and might not even realize you've hit it.

Datapath Organization. It is very worthwhile to learn the MIPS architecture from the Hennessey and Patterson book, even if you consider MIPS to be an obsolete architecture.
Even if you have no intention of programming in assembly language, as long as computers are digital machines, it behooves you to understand how arithmetic and control are done with gates, how data are organized in binary, and how to implement algorithims using only the most essential and elementary pieces. This is a field of study that never stops also.

These two areas are really where I see knowledge gaps in people I have interviewed. Now, in the real world, (e.g., business software), it's not likely that someone will ask you to prove the time complexity of an algorithm. However, there is definitely a difference in the problem solving approaches by people who do have, and people who do not have a solid theoretical background.

On the other hand, there are university grads who come out of college with great math and science, and (in my neck of the woods) excellent unix systems programming skills, but who have had one, maybe two semesters of courses where they developed any kind of sophisticated system in an OO language. And you can't even count on them having taken a database course (a 400-level elective, which is essentially mutually exclusive with a 3D graphics course, again, here in my hood).

Bear in mind, my shop specializes in a certain flavor of in-house business software, and I really like it when people come in with genuine experience with Java and J2EE. It would make me literally cry if someone were to come in and show me their copy of GoF95 where the page margins are worn down from it being read and referenced so much :-) There is a similar phenomenon among Unix systems programmers -- there are specific sections of the books by W. Richard Stevens that I expect to be more weathered than others.

Maybe I'm giving away the length of my beard, and I am exaggerating a little to make a point. There are some books that you probably already have on your shelf. Actually study them. If your school doesn't teach 3 semesters of discrete math followed by 2 semesters of algorithm analysis and a grad program in analysis, it's not really a CS program at all, in my opinion.

Here we go again..

[tuomoks]

Actually most of the answers are good - it depends! I would define it ( as many alreay ) to be able to use a computer to whatever tasks they have been assigned to do - period. The problem (IMHO) is that in todays world the HR or whatever are making the definitions. I was tempted to seek a CIO job where the most important skill was MS Project ( $500K/year + bonus promised.. ) Can you believe that ? Of course after 35+ years working on computers / systems / networks / installations I know that any secretary types faster than I so I didn't ! Now - this question is really different in /. world - how many knows how the disk controller reorders the requests and when, what is the difference between byte and bit multiplexing on channel, why and how to reorder the execution order on pipeline, why you code account numbers in 2's completemente in SQL database, why and when you access sequentially and filter your queries instead of using keys, why you optimize mtu's based on your latency calculations on a network, why you find the customer network configuration BEFORE you go installing your system in that, and so on.. So (IMHO again) we should forget terms like "computer literate" and start defining what the real thing is. The downside - a lot of HR and middle management people would be out of work - bad thing ??

its about how many times you fail vs succeed

[neddy1]

I would say that when your computer literate you would succeed a bit more then fail every time you try something new (for you) on/with your computer. Its not that you are going to know it ALL, all the time, just know enough to have mistakesfailure.

Re:its about how many times you fail vs succeed

[neddy1]

crap, forgot some words. "Its not that you are going to know it ALL, all the time, just know enough to have mistakes less then your failure." I guess im not literate.

W00t!!!!

[Yeechang Lee]

If u cn rd th1s, u r c0mput3r l33t3r8 n r a tru haxx0r!!!11!!!!!

Not about computer itself

[hdante]

Computer literacy is not about understanding the computer inner workings. When a buzzword like this is targeted toward children, one should obviously assume that it has nothing to do with techicalities. In particular, most of those children won't ever have a job related to computer science or computer engineering. In this sense, the answer gets a little simpler (well, not much), because we can understand a computer just the same way as a blender or a car. The blender is used to blend food and the car is used for transportation. And the computer, is it used to compute ? Well, this is where things get more difficult.

People need to learn how to deal with computers, because computers have taken place of other, (theoretically) less productive, tools. In society, computer is not really used as a calculator (although for a college student it may be the physical part of Matlab). A computer is pretty much a typewriter. A computer is something you need to (not so) quickly comunicate with people that you work with. A computer is also a simple interface for you to find the movie you want, the book you want, etc. Finally, a computer is a place where you can find some extra information that your "non-virtual" world doesn't have (like, how people cope with the climate in Siberia, or something). And what one should learn about computers, then ? Computer literacy, then, becomes just a bureaucratic process. Since some technician decided that the user interface would require that you understood files, copy and paste, the close button, virus, you have to learn those things. Since the software that runs everywhere is Microsoft Word, one must learn how to use Microsoft Word. Since the software that... (fill in here) one must learn Internet Explorer/Firefox/Outlook/Skype/MSN/etc. Further understanting of the computer isn't really necessary, the same way people don't really understand how a car works (although the most people tries to abuse your system, more you or someone in your group should know about computers).

Now, you may think that a computer was about to bring useful information. You may think that a computer is about making calculations/decoding Nazi codes during WWII/bringing world peace/enlightening people/etc etc etc. Well, this is true because anything that calculates so fast can be used by humans to do those things. However it has nothing to do with computer literacy, as expected by society. A single person opinion has nothing to do with what society wants (even mine, yours, etc).

So, what is computer literacy ?
- know Word
- know Internet, e-mail
- know files, file formats
- know CDs, DVDs
- know malware
- overview of computer hardware

What computer literacy is not ?
- Know linux/windows/control panel/video resolution
- Know python, visual studio, assembly
- Know video card/modem/SATA controller

Worthless definition

[Sycraft-fu]

Because there's a big difference between computer operation and computer programming. I know programmers who are worthless operators. Hell, I support them professionally. They can write some code, that's for sure, better than I can, that's a skill I lack, but they suck at even simple systems administration. They understand how to put code together, but they don't understand how the system actually operates. I can explaing from the ground up how everything works, in considerable detail, but I can't write code to command that system.

As an analogy to writing, since you brought it up, take the difference between form and function. No doubt you've seen some typographical and spelling errors in my post thus far, there always are. The tyops are because I'm not good at touch typing, and the spelling errors because I've always been bad at spelling, and simply can't be bothered to spellcheck a posting I'm bashing out on some message board. However for all that, I'm guessing you aren't having any trouble following what I'm saying, understanding my ideas. I am able to express my ideas with language easily and quickly. This is all being written as fast as I can type, I needn't stop and revise.

So am I literate? The answer in general seems to be yes, highly so. In university at least I scored highly in related subjects, and in general discourse people say they find me easy to understand, well read, etc. Yet my form is lacking, you can probably find a 6th grader that has more reliably accurate spelling than I do.

Does the form or the funciton matter? Is literacy the knowledge and execution of the rules of English flawlessly, or is it the ability to understand language, and express one's self through the same?

I'd say the same general thing applies to computers. I don't believe computer literacy comes from knowing a programming language. I believe it comes from understanding how to use and fix a computer. Perhaps I'm biased, since that's what I do, but that seems to be the useful skill to me. Most people don't need to know how to program, that's why we have programmers. Division of labour and all. However most people do need ot know how to operate their computer to use it for the tasks they want to do. That's what it is, after all, just a tool to get certian things done. A carpenter needn't craft a hammer to understand it's use in his trade. It's a tool to him, nothing more.

I think the programming demarcation is just elitest crap, to try and feel like the literate are a special class that few belong to. Well, just like with real literacy, I say that's bunk. If you can read and write the basic things needed to funciton in society, you are functionally literate. You don't need to write a poem or a novel to be literate. Likewise if you understand and can use computers to do what you need without difficulty, you are functionally computer literate.

Nobody has read every book, nobody knows everything about computers. Not all people are poets, not all people are programmers.

Re:Worthless definition

[Flambergius]

I don't believe computer literacy comes from knowing a programming language. I believe it comes from understanding how to use and fix a computer. Perhaps I'm biased, since that's what I do, but that seems to be the useful skill to me. Most people don't need to know how to program, that's why we have programmers. Division of labour and all. However most people do need ot know how to operate their computer to use it for the tasks they want to do.

Well, I do believe you are biased. :-) But you are very close to truth. (By truth I mean the position that I happen to hold.) The key is that most people have tasks they want and need to do with a computer. You say operate, the grandparent said programming, I would say command. A computer literate person should be able to issue commands to a computer.

Knowing a programming language is one skill that allows you to command a computer, but most non-programmers and even many programmers have a very limited view of computer programming. They see only systems and application programming as real programming. This leaves out the area that would be the most useful to most people to know: information manipulation or more generally just working with information. As you said, division of labor means that most people don't need know specialist skills. Fixing their computers and application programming are specialist skills. However, most skilled workers (the professionals) today and increasingly in the future need to understand and be able to express information within their problem domains. They also need to know how to extract or otherwise develop new information from old information. That can be done with domain specific languages (SQL or XQuery-derivate or OWL), but knowing a high-level generic programming language (Python, but I'm biased) would allow you to cross domains more easily and will be very valuable skill (or meta-skill) in the future.

--Flam

The answer is simple

[nightowl03d]

Volumes 1-3 of The Art of Computer Programming by Knuth. Be sure to do all the problems .

Re:The answer is simple

[fishbowl]

>Volumes 1-3 of The Art of Computer Programming by Knuth. Be sure to do all the problems .

Knuth is great, but I don't know about actually working through all the MIX stuff.

It might be more constructive to get Cormen/Lieserson/Rivest and read it cover to cover, however long it takes to do it. Similarly, maybe a summer with a discrete math book would be appropriate before (or during) that.

On the practical side, study the complete works of W. Richard Stevens, and rightfully call yourself a Unix system programming guru.

Choose an editor and learn every feature of it. (not getting into the argument of which is better).

Choose a high level language and read whatever O'Reilly has to say on it. Different languages have different canonical literature. Choose mentors and take their advice.

Can you post to slashdot?

[timminator]

That's the best test of computer literacy.

Computer Literacy

[calore]

A computer literate person is a person who can operate an unfamiliar computer system without the fear of breaking it. Most computer software is friendly enough to not let you break stuff that easily. Secondly, it is someone who can sit down with software they have never used before, and manage to figure out how to use it without taking a class at the local community college, through using familiar icons that appear in several programs, familiar layouts(like switching between MS Office and OpenOffice), or god forbid using that feature that is built into most programs that 9/10 people don't even know exists called HELP. The way I see it, computer literacy quite simply put is knowing HOW and WHERE to find the information you need.

The first step in computer literacy ...

[can56]

are literate developers. Users are a bigger bag of hammers.

time matters

[Anonymous Coward]

It depends when you first used a computer.

I started by inserting the MSDOS disk, then put in disk with the word processing app, did my typing, then had to swap to a data disk to save my file, then put the app disk back in, when finished put the MSDOS disk back in to get to the command prompt. Then the pacman disk 1 etc...

From this I was aware of what the OS did, what the apps did, and what data is. It was essential to organise data properly and put labels on disks, the alternative was to sift through 500 floppies until you found what you wanted. This is probably similar to the initial stages of what many people here went through - thus their definition of literacy are sth along the lines of understanding the basics of these principles.

Now, the OS does everything by itself, and Google has replaced the need for organised information structures because searching is faster than spending the time to set up a proper system in the first place. The definition of "computer literacy" I have from my experience will someday be refered to in the same way as we refer to "computer literacy" from the previous generation (tape readers & assembly) - a few people need to know these historical things because the modern stuff is still built on it, but it is only a few specialists.

The future??? Given that the computing field has so many layers of complexity, new technologies just make it deeper and generally, people only learn as much as they need to - it will only be a few geeks who learn the OS to a deeper level than "click the icon" and data management to more than "google it".

Conclusion: Just as the problems caused by lazy/ineffiecient/incompetent programmers are catered for with better hardware, the problems of "illiterate" users are catered for with Microsoft and Google.

(Sorry Google, you have a good tool, but a good tool in the hands of inept users only leads to....)

Re:time matters

[fishbowl]

>It depends when you first used a computer.

In 1965 I had a toy that accepted punched cards, each with a trivia question, and compared the user's multiple-choice input to what was coded on the card, and indicated a result on a
matrix display of flashlight bulbs. The card feeder mechanism was motorized, and I recognized this toy as The Second Coolest Thing In The World (the first being a modular, articulated, battery powered, tread driven robot that I have never seen any vintage toy catalogs or anywhere else.)

Anyway I know that toy wasn't a "computer", but it certainly planted a seed that directed my life and career. By 1973 I had access to the telex network which means that as a little kid I was basically using the "internet" as it was, and also a little later, programming in FOCAL on a remote PDP, from the teletype in my dad's office. I was also able to access an IBM 360 system (Dow Chemical's order system, also remoted from my dad's office) where I could create and save text files (and nothing else that I could ever figure out.) I learned the bizarre EBCDIC character set before I learned cursive writing... And I could read ASCII on TTY paper tape, which I simply recognized as a substitution cipher (something I learned from a children's menu in a restaurant.)

So my parents recognized my interest and aptitude (duh) and bought me a Model I TRS-80. It had a 2-digit serial number, and unfortunately, when it was upgraded to Level II, all they did was replace the thing. I appreciated the upgrade, but even then I realized that losing the very early serial number would be regrettable later.

Oh well.

So I went to college, and discovered to my horror that, #1, the idea of the personal microcomputer had yet to catch on, #2, the curriculum was focused heavily on COBOL programming (which was still done with punch cards!), #3, that the OS used was "MUSIC" (McGill University System for Interactive Computing), which I later realized was a fairly good VMS clone, but *BORING* to learn, and #4, university advisors were told to discourage "Computer Science" as a major (no future in it) and recommended "Business Computer Information Systems" instead.

So to make a long story short, my degree is in music theory and composition. All my formal computer science education has come recently after two decades of working in the field and a lifetime of self-education... Doesn't bother me a bit.

Test to determine if you are Computer Illiterate

[Smuffe]

Easy. Just take the test:

You answered "yes" to 122 of 510 questions, making you 76.1% hacker pure; that is, you are 76.1% pure in the hacker domain (you have 23.9% hacker in you).
According to the scoring guide, your hacker experience level is: Computer Illiterate :(

It's a lot more than "keyboarding"

[Flexagon]

It's a lot more than the high school "keyboarding" course. That's at the high end of "Oh, look how computer-literate little Hortense is, now that she can use the computer!", meaning just run Word, e-mail, browse, play games and IM. For those outside the US school system, "keyboarding" is a course tought here in junior/middle or even high school and designed to teach familiarity with basic typing, document creation, e-mail, browser, and other simple skills.

A democracy requires educated citizens. Today, that means that citizens must know something about the actual power and limitations of computers. And that means that they must have at least some familiarity with programming. And it can't wait until college; the knowledge must be part of the basic educational program for everyone. Beyond that, the minimum knowledge level should include an overview of basic components of a computerized society, such as networks, databases, and their opportunities and threats. Without this basic knowledge, both citizens and the leaders they choose will make dangerous decisions. They already are.

I had a boss who used to say that everyones' birth certificate should come up for renewal every year, like a license. Basic knowledge of programming (not necessarily programming knowledge of Basic :-) is a great candidate for the test.

There are quite a few other subjects that similarly need more attention. Math and science generally should be on the list. In many schools, history is a check-box subject that should also get more attention.

some observations, problems with defining Comp lit

[Susceptor]

Computer literacy and how to measure such literacy First, define what you mean by computer literacy. Does computer literacy for example include a student's ability to install ram/HD/mother board/etc, the ability to put hardware together from scratch, the ability to use basic programs like excel/word. Could it be the ability to fix hardware problems, recognize when a problem is hardware and when it is software based. Being able to adapt and use new programs previously not encountered. Perhaps computer literacy is being able to understand basic code: being able to use Visual Basic, C, Java, etc? I would say that all of the above are important are important and relevant measures of computer literacy. What's more, all of them are required to some degree to function well in the modern workplace. If teachers are serious about having students coming out of school compute literate, students will have to be able to do all of the above. This raises the question, first how can you "test" someone when it comes to being able to problem-solve a network problem for example, and secondly, how can teachers teach this material when most of them are not knowledgeable enough themselves to perform all of the above. So there you have it. (a) We can define what computer literacy at it's basic should be, but we can't really test it per se, at least not the way things are usually tested in schools (choose from the following (a)(b)(c)....) (b) The second problem is that teachers don't know enough to teach the subject, so even if we solved the problem of testability, by say ignoring testing or making testing more subjective, we would still have this fundamental problem. The result is watered down computer literacy, with literacy defines as being able to recognize how to use basic programs like word and excel and foregoing explanations of how to repair/upgrade/program computers.

Where do you start?

[Anonymous Coward]

I would start with:

Fetch
Decode
Execute

Testing computer literacy hmm...

[IDontLinkMondays]

My theory, although computer literacy can be a few different things... or a lot of different things, it's impossible really to measure.

In one definition, my ather is computer literate, he can log on, check his mail, and he knows a few buzzwords. But he doesn't seem to be able to figure anything out for himself.

Another definition is that my mother-in-law is computer literate since she calls me from the church as asks "The floppy drive stopped working in the church's accounting computer, can I just put the floppy drive into it from my computer?", I responded "Yes", so she went home got the floppy drive from her computer (internal one) and installed it in the church's computer, she called me "Well, the light is stuck on and it doesn't seem to work", so I informed her to turn the ribbon cable over and that it was not really a standard on floppy drives which way the cable pointed. Later she called, "I'm at the computer store, can I just buy any floppy drive to replace the old one?", I told her "Yes". This woman is 73 years old next week and this happened 2 years ago.

We could say that my nephew is computer literate, he is able to build his own computers and can write simple C programs. He's an expert World of Warcraft player and has memorized every library function in the WoW macro scripting system. We could call him computer literate.

The guy writing the bug tracking system at my old job is also responsible for configuring the Cisco layer-3 switches. He has a relatively thorough understanding of simple routing technologies and the main TCP/IP packet format. He can code PHP/Perl and some C. He doesn't quite understand stored proceedures at this time, but it will come I'm sure. I guess this guy is computer literate, but I guess some people wouldn't say so.

We can talk about people that can program applications all day long, design their own PCI cards for embeddding a bank of DSPs, develop single board computers for implementing iGMPv3 management features, debug a BGP session, fix nearly every problem in a users Windows PC, secure a Linux system, etc... This guy is probably computer literate.

Literacy is a matter of perspective. I know guys that develop hardware based DCT engines for HD video compression, they understand math, programming, bus architecture, and can do just about anything with an in-circuit-emulator that can be done. But at the same time, I wouldn't hire them to manage a corporate network since they are not literate in this area.

So, the way I like to define computer literacy is based on ones problem solving ability. Of course you can hand them a rubik's cube and ask them to solve it, but that's a stupid human resources trick. If you want to really find out if they're literate, ask them a question relating to what it is that you want from them and watch how they go about solving the issue. For example, if you need a network engineer, ask them how they would solve the problem as follows :

-- We have two office buildings, up until now, we've been connected by a 4 channel SHDSL solution that gives us 8-bits between the offices. Sadly, the only solution available to us is SHDSL 8 mbit lines, what would you recommend for increasing our bandwidth between offices.

Add more lines is always the solution, but ask the how they would solve the issue of using them simultaniously. I helped a friend solve this problem 2 years ago. It was an interesting problem, but what was interesting is that there are many ways of doing it, but we settled on routing through a multilink-ppp configuration. Worked really well and was solved using no more than a single Cisco router on each end. Even now, I would consider doing the same, but I'm itching to see IP over ATM over IP over PPP over ATM. The cell structure should cut overhead considerably and possibly eliminate the need for every 10th line due to bandwidth savings.

Another social joke comes into reality!

[VxJasonxV]

I always thought that it should be required to take a test in order to use a computer.
Well, it's not required, but at least it'll set the NEWB standard.
(New Equivalent Wisdom Barrier)

To actually answer the question at hand, I think the test needs to have a screenshot of two sites. Like, paypal.com, and a phishing site, and the individual needs to figure out which one is actually PayPal.

This test will probably work better when actually web browsing... so let's go that route instead.

Your own fault

[SmallFurryCreature]

You released the keys didn't you. He wrote the command a bit confusing. It is supposed to be LCTRL+X+RCTRL+C+V+S+ALT+F4+Lef & Right click.

Do that and a goddess will appear to grant your every wish. Or untangle your fingers.

Re:Your own fault

[Anonymous Coward]

I type this with my toes, for no goddess appeared! HELP!

literacy vs penmanship

[jefu]

At my university we have a "computer literacy" requirement. Its all about MS Office and how to do nice things like change fonts. Students even get to pass in assignments on paper. They have to pass a test. The test requires (more or less) rote memorization of which keystrokes/menu selections to use - you can be a very good user of Office and not pass the test because you don't know the "approved" way to do things (it has actually happened that advanced CS students have failed the test).

So it is not really "literacy", more "penmanship". After all, you can make letters without being able to read or write effectively.

<theatrical-shock> They don't even teach that spreadsheets may need to be debugged! </theatrical-shock>

And there is absolutely no mention of Unix and almost none of MacOS. And little enough of things like phishing, viruses, firewalls, security,...

Binary!

[Greyfox]

Or not...

Learn how to formulate a specific goal you wish to achieve with the computer.

Learn how to find the information about how to achieve that goal. Even if it means going to a public library and borrowing a book. Eventually you will formulate a goal that you wish to use your computer to speed up your searches for information on how to use your computer and then you will discover Google.

I think those two things will take you a long way.

Interestingly enough, I like to tell newbies to ask google a plain english question. You'd be surprised at how often that gets a useful answer. Anything from "What do you get when you multiply 6 by 9?" to "Why does asparagus make my pee smell funny?" Once you learn how to ask the right question, the world is your oyster. But that's true in fields outside computers as well as in IT.

Speaking the language

[thegma]

I'd think of it in terms of when they're lost, what do they do? Can they tell you what they'd like to do and where they're stuck? Can you comfortably tell them what to do without listing every step? Say someone emails them a video file, they open it, WMP fires up by default and can't find the codec. They're not sure what's going on, so they call you. Does the conversation go:

"I opened the attachment and it said something about not being able to find a codec."
"Google VLC, download and install that. Open the file with VLC and it should play."

Or does it go:

"The video won't play!"
"What video?"

"Now go to File, open, find the file and click ok. Is it playing?"

To be computer literate

[Anonymous Coward]

>>What Should One Know to be Truly Computer Literate?

Ummmm, machine language?

MOD PARENT UP

[basshedz2]

Being able to program isn't something you need to be computer literate. The dictionary definition of literate is:

1 a : EDUCATED, CULTURED b : able to read and write
2 a : versed in literature or creative writing : LITERARY b : LUCID, POLISHED c : having knowledge or competence

The main requirement (in my opinion) is that you should be able to sit down in front of a program/OS that you've never used before and work out how to use it at a basic level - save, create new file, change the desktop, or whatever. I would say that if you have that sort of knowledge that you can transfer from one situation to the next you can consider yourself computer literate.

b

My definition of computer literacy in a nutshell

[PostComment()]

My definition is simply this:

There are two rules to understand about computers.

• The computer will do EXACTLY what you want to do.
• When the computer is not doing something you wanted to do, refer to rule #1.

No really though, from my experience as a user and then later programmer, this seemed to always be the case. A lot of times we assume or imply that we wanted it to do something but then did not foresee potential problems or logic errors and it ends up doing something we didn't want it to do or additional things we forget to exactly tell it NOT to do, and that is when you have problems. Or maybe we didn't understand clearly enough what that function or button was intended to do.

So, I guess many other rules and methods and techniques can also be derived from these two basic rules.

Well, that's my two cents.

How To Ask Questions The Smart Way

[thingsidontdo]

http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html and knowledge about the basic tools to do it.

But it IS magic!

[meringuoid]

When you press buttons on your computer keyboard, those inputs are read by programming - and something happens. It's not just magic. Too many people, having absolutely no clue how anything works, just think everything runs on magic.

What is magic? Words and symbols of power that shape the world according to the will of the magician. The magician speaks the right magic words, and draws the right sigils, and obtains the desired effect.

Meanwhile, the INT 8 half-orc barbarian doesn't have the faintest idea what all the runes carved on his battleaxe actually do. He doesn't care. He knows the end result is a +1 to hit and that suits him just fine. Neither is the ranger concerned about exactly how these enchanted bracers improve his aim with a longbow; they just do. Only the wizard needs to worry about the details.

And what is programming? Words and symbols of power that shape the computer according to the will of the programmer. Type the right instructions, give the right command arguments, and obtain the desired effect.

Ever created an infinite loop? Had a recursive process go berserk on you? Made a small mistake while invoking rm -rf? Yeah. Pure 'Sorcerer's Apprentice'.

We are the nearest thing to magicians that has ever existed in reality. Our spells work and are truly powerful, our mistakes cause incomprehensible chaos, and when one of us turns bad then sometimes the whole world can suffer the consequences. No wonder the muggles treat our creations like they're the mysterious products of a magical power beyond their understanding: that's what they are.

Re:But it IS magic!

[Anonymous Coward]

We are the nearest thing to magicians that has ever existed in reality. Our spells work and are truly powerful, our mistakes cause incomprehensible chaos, and when one of us turns bad then sometimes the whole world can suffer the consequences.

A humorous analogy, but one that seems to indicate a slightly inflated image of the importance of your chosen career field. I don't think people at large consider computers as important or as mystifying as you make them out to be.

Re:But it IS magic!

[MrNougat]

Just to make things clear - I am not a developer today, I'm a network engineer.

And it's still not magic. It's transistors and gates and electricity. I understand what you're saying: "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistiguishable from magic."

However, just because something is indistiguishable from magic doesn't mean that it is magic.

Re:But it IS magic!

[vga_init]

What is magic?

Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. :)

Re:But it IS magic!

[CommanderData]

Thanks, that really made my day! Oh well, back to spellcasting... I mean programming! :)

Re:But it IS magic!

[Geminii]

However, just because something is indistiguishable from magic doesn't mean that it is magic. If two things are completely and utterly indistinguishable, what's the point in treating them differently? Those who can determine the difference can and should treat them differently. Those who cannot determine the difference with the tools available to them can only guess. Far better that they use an encompassing term and follow up with sufficient background information to allow someone else to make the call.

Re:But it IS magic!

[MrNougat]

If two things are completely and utterly indistinguishable, what's the point in treating them differently?

Now you're talking about philosophy. While I've been down that road before, in this thread I was thinking concretely.

Philosopy aside, the human community has the knowledge that computers are not run on magic. Certainly, many individuals in that community do not know anything about the facts of why and how computers work, and you'd be hard pressed to find any one person who knows everything about how and why computers work. Individuals who are not experts in a given arena must depend on and trust the knowledge of other people who are experts in that arena.

Now, if a sufficiently advanced technology appeared from outer space, much of humanity might treat it as magic. And I am certain that there will be some subset who will instead try to figure out how it works, because everything that humanity has thought was magic throughout the ages has turned out to have scientific explanations.

Re:But it IS magic!

[chris.evans]

Infinite loops are useful like in software that doesnt need to exit once loaded. And the problem with recursive routines is that the programmer didnt design an appropiate limit to stop the process from overflowing and running amok. Ok, what I suggest is that most "magicians" like it when people cannot figure out how it works as that leaves them at their mercy and coming back for more.

What Should One Know to be Truly Computer Literate

[Sodki]

Know how to install Linux-from-scratch without looking at the documentation.

fundamentals

[Anonymous Coward]

With only 4 books, you can covers all what is needed to be litterate. They only covers essential knowledge and avoid everything in the hype.

Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs, by Abelson, Sussman, and Sussman

Introduction to Automata Theory, Languages, and Computation by Hopcroft, Motwani and Ullman

Operating Systems Design and Implementation by Andrew S Tanenbaum
http://vig.prenhall.com/catalog/academic/product/0 ,1144,0131429388,00.html

UNIX Network Programming by W. Richard Stevens

... Or your arrogance?

[fantomas]

Or maybe the other students were humiliated by your arrogance and decided not to participate: "I was the only one who was computer literate! I have taken a university course in computers! all my class mates are lusers!" ... hmmm...

In some cultures it would be polite not to put your hand up when a professor asks a question like this as it would be considered arrogant to do so. I would be interested in your fellow students reasons for not putting their hands up. I'd bet that some of them were perfectly competent at the skills the professor was asking for and they didn't all need remedial special classes to get up to speed on computer skills required. Can you comment on this?

I'd agree with you that computer literacy is field specific but I'd disagree that you need a CS major to be considered computer literate (grow up college boy! see the real world!) or you need a high level of trouble shooting skills. If you can complete the tasks you need to achieve then I'd say you're functionally literate.

Re:... Or your arrogance?

[pla]

Or maybe the other students were humiliated by your arrogance and decided not to participate

Umm... As described, the professor merely asked a quick poll-type question - Not necessarily even one with an "answer". Just a basic count-the-hands, which would have had no follow-up except that only one person (in a room full of people who should have said yes) responded positively.


In some cultures it would be polite not to put your hand up

Welcome to America. ;-)


If you can complete the tasks you need to achieve then I'd say you're functionally literate.

I would more-or-less agree with that, but I (possibly incorrectly) took one more key point from MrChaotica's anecdote - Only he felt comfortable enough with his skills to call himself "computer literate". Not to say that confidence matters more than actual skill (and I'd say the most dangerous users have confidence but little real understanding), but it certainly does make a huge difference.

need to know

[Anonymous Coward]

where the any key is

Just...

[Anonymous Coward]

Common Lisp

Hmm..computer literacy

[caoss]

To be considered literate in a language, you have to know how the language is constructed, how to use it, what is acceptable use etc... As an old timer (well, oldish!), my induction into computing included such things as binary mathematics, writting data directly to disk, writting assembly code to tell the computer exactly what to do. The use of applications is not computer literacy, that is more application literacy or familiarisation. Alos, the ability to build a computer is not computer literacy as it is componentised in such a way that it would be difficult to get it wrong! Computer literacy is knowing how IT works, and then familiarising yourself with the OS and applications. The important thing is 'each to their own!"

know how to type

[Anonymous Coward]

My boss hired a guy to help me on my project. The guy is a MSCE, and has half a dozen other MS certificates and he can not type.

Have you ever asked somebody to do something and watched in pain as every operation takes 2 minutes to perform?

What they need to know to do what they need to do.

[Eskarel]

Anything else is superfluous. They don't need to know it and most of them don't want to know it. If organizations provide adequate training on new applications that should be all this shouldn't be a problem.

Lots of people even on slashdot don't know how to rebuild their car's engine, but yet people expect that regular ordinary people should be able to build a PC from scratch and install an OS. Lots of people don't know lots of things, but not knowing something you don't need to know isn't the end of the world.

That basically boils down to, surfing the web, checking e-mail, composing basic documents, doing basic work with a spreadsheet, putting together a presentation, how to touch type, and whatever you need to do for your job.

Astonishingly enough this is pretty much exactly what they teach in schools. It might also be helpful to be able to install basic software and even some basic hardware(like a mouse, keyboard, printer), but that's not really necessary for everyone to know.

As much as we might think otherwise, for most people computers are tools not a puzzle which needs to be worked out, or perhaps more precisely collections of tools. You're literate with a hammer if you know how to hit things with it, and you can be literate with a hammer without having any idea how to use an arc welder, or even a screwdriver.

You don't have to be computer literate, you have to be literate in the parts of the computer you use.

Fish

[dalroth5]

In my country, schools nowadays have nothing to do with teaching children how to go about the process of thinking.

One reason for this is that since human knowledge continues to grow, but children still spend the same eleven to thirteen years at school, some valuable things have to be left out.

Another reason is that some years ago our media whipped up popular opinion to demand that education be made more 'relevant' by focusing more on 'vocational' subjects. In other words, they expend more time and effort on things which _directly_ help you to get a job.

Like it or not, that means Microsoft office products. Not critical analysis, not thought experiments, not logic, not philosophy, not science, not art, not music, not history: Word, Excel and Powerpoint. If you want to get anything better than a minimum wage manual job, then in this country at least, you MUST know Word, Excel and Powerpoint. In this country therefore, those tools constitute computer literacy.

As far as fish are concerned, history suggests it goes more like, "Give a man a fish and you'll feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, and he'll tell his friends. Soon after that there'll be no more fish. Soon after _that_, there'll be no more men. So give a man a fish, and stop playing God.".

Re:Fish

[dhasenan]

Check out an eighth grade exam from 1900. They had to know as much as you would at the end of high school, maybe the first year of college, except for calculus and trigonometry.

http://www.edu-cyberpg.com/Teachers/1895exam.html -- though note some of the answers given are wrong, such as that given for "case", "cognate", and "trigraph"; and "syllabification" is used instead of "syllabication" these days.

At any rate, I believe that we've been giving less content to students and keeping them for longer hours.

Computer literacy with OS other than Windows.

[onevulcanme]

My personal opinion is that computer literacy rates would drop down tremendously if the test was with any OS other than Windows or perhaps Apple's OSX. The average Joe like myself has used windows for a long time and knows a little about OSX. But if I was introduced to Unix, Linux, or some other OS probably I would be totally lost. The average person that surfs the web, writes email, installs a few programs, plays a few games, and is not studying for a career in computers probably would not be able to do any of the above in anything other than Windows or *maybe* Apple OSX. I think schools should have a computer classroom that includes multiple operating systems instead of mainly featuring windows. Then the true literacy rate would really begin climbing.

Re: rhetoric

[dalroth5]

What's that new buzzword on /.? Oh yeah, "Bzzzzt."

Rhetoric is old-fashioned and therefore had to be thrown out along with logic and philosophy. Nowadays we want jobs, so it's Word, Excel and Powerpoint please.

Minimum requirements for computer literacy

[smcdow]

To truly be computer literate, you should know at least the following:

• /bin/sh and friends
• The C programming language
• ed, vi, and emacs
• Perl
• Python
• one-liners for sed, awk, etc.
• make

Be safe

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't use Windows

my definition

[joshetc]

For me being computer literate is not / very rarely asking for help with your computer. That doesn't mean they need to know how to install linux as an example.. just that said person is capable of doing whatever they want to do on their computer without direct assistance. (Of course reading a manual.. or using the electricity from the power company doesn't count :D)

Contrapositive

[dhasenan]

You have to be computer literate to be a CS major. Otherwise you'll fail most of your courses.

And the other students most likely were too eager not to mark themselves out in case they got extra work.

Re:Contrapositive

[luna69]

> You have to be computer literate to be a CS major.
> Otherwise you'll fail most of your courses.

So, SO not true (at least not necessarily so)! Loads of CS majors get through 4+ years of college, receive a BS in CS, and STILL know very little about computers that's useful in the real world!

Sure, they can implement various sorting algorithms in half a dozen languages, but they still can't figure out how to add RAM to their machines or do simple OS maintenance.

Re:Contrapositive

[yuri benjamin]

Loads of CS majors get through 4+ years of college, receive a BS in CS, and STILL know very little about computers that's useful in the real world!

Why do you think they call it a " BS "?

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

To communicate more effectively

[Eideewt]

If the goal is to use computers to communicate effectively then the most basic thing they have to know is how to communicate in the first place. Many people will never need to know more than how to use a word processor or send an email, but they will need to know how to write in those programs. It's not computer specific, but I think writing skill is the most important part of effective computer-based communication.

Security training is also pretty important. Users need to know when their actions are likely to compromise their computers, and they need to know why.

After that, I think it would be valuable if everyone were taught basic stuff like installing printers and how to work a command line. A little programming would be nice. I wouldn't try to teach this at anything lower than a college level though. Younger students will just get their geeky friends to do it for them, because they won't care to learn it.

Programming

[Terminus32]

They should be teaching kids how to program computers, not how to type letters in Micro$oft Office! *tut tut*

Re:You are computer literate if...

[kadnan]

you can search Porn sites...

I think I said this before...

[Lord Bitman]

Take it literally. If you are "Computer Literate", you know how to read a computer. Learn to look at the information you are presented. There's plenty of stuff on-screen all the time. You dont need to know how to use C or how to set up a network. You need to know how to follow the information that was there in front of you.
In linux, you're still screwed without being, say, HOWTO-literate. But for Windows, you can follow the on-screen instructions. How many "computer literate" people knew how to set up their network before they first tried? And how many knew /after/ they first tried, because they were able to read the fucking screen in front of them.

I'm annoyed every time I see someone staring blankly at a screen. Read the fucking thing, it's in fucking english.

I seem to have gotten annoyed half-way through this post. Fuck anybody who doesnt even try to learn something.

not at all

[briancnorton]

I cannot help but think that computer literacy is all about using computers to be able to communicate more effectively

This may be well meaning, but it is all wrong. There is a fundamental and important distinction between being computer literate and internet literate. Knowing how to use the internet is important, but it is only tangentially related to the operation of a computer.

On Engineers And Cars

[sonofdelphi]

Knowing how it works and knowing how to make it do things you want are two different things altogether. There is a problem with the engineer-driver analogy.
"You can be an engineer and still not know how to drive!"

One should be considered computer-literate if and only if one can use the computer to do things and, you know, get by!

Paying for it

[Nurgled]

I disagree. You can get anything by paying for it if you have enough money. In this particular case, you can pay other people to, say, create you a spreadsheet. These are the two ways to approach every problem: Fix it yourself or pay someone else to fix it. I pay someone to clean my windows, and someone pays me to write software. One person can't do everything.

(and sure, I could clean my own windows, but I don't have a tall enough ladder and I'd rather be doing something else with my spare time.)

it's up to the instructors

[v1]

As poster points out, learning one piece of software (or one group of software) well does not provide you with a well-rounded education in computers. The key here is to require diversity.

Teachers can do this by creating say, five projects per semester, with similar goals, and require that the students or teams use different software to solve each of the five projects. Then give a sixth project where the students can use any of the software they choose to.

This gives the students the chance to sample several different solutions/softwares and gives them a more open perspective as to what the right tool for the job is. In the end, they can take what they have learned throughout the semester and apply that knowledge to picking the best solution for them for the last project.

When the last project is presented, the team should have to do a short discussion of what decisions factored into their choice of software. It's always interesting to listen to these presentations, because the students always find out things that even the instructor had not foreseen. Sometimes tools that would seem the least useful to a task happen to do something differently and when properly applied, makes difficult tasks almost trivial. (consider towers of hanoi problems... now use a "clumsy" language that is built around recursion, and what, you solve it in 3 lines of code!)

When all you know is MS Office, you fall victim to "when all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail".

Computer Literacy - all for it

[CharlieG]

I'm all for computer literacy - in fact, all the old folks I know who were computers are literate...

OH - you mean PEOPLE knowing something about computers.....

NEVER MIND

Not needed

[Sqreater]

Every person with an area of expertise thinks his or her area is not taught deeply enough to the rest of humanity. But the truth is, I suspect, that we all sit here vastly overeducated for the positions we eventually occupy in life. The same with computers.

Literacy is incorrectly applied to computers. The term "computer literacy" is applied to computers to make the knowledge of computers seem to be as fundamental, as essential, as the knowledge of reading and writing. This causes many more computers to be sold than necessary. It causes many expensive training programs to be created at massive expense. That is the goal of "computer literacy" -- making money.

What do children actually NEED to know about computers? Very little I suspect. How to turn them on and how to type, basically. The rest comes over time naturally as needed.

Computer literacy depends on OS

[Anonymous Coward]

Linux - Computer Genius
Windows - Knowledeable user
OS X - Dunce

At least two kinds (probably more)

[Archtech]

This is the sort of question whose main value is that it can't be answered as it stands; instead you have to look more closely at the assumptions behind it. (A latter-day computer koan?)

The two categories that immediately stand out a mile are end-users and developers. The required skills, and the amount of time required to become proficient, are poles apart. The whole emphasis of generations of computer designers has been to lower the barriers to entry for end-users - continually making it easier, bringing the user interface closer to the user and further from the binary machine. Dumbing down, if you want to look at it that way. End-user proficiency is what the great majority of requirements for "IT literacy" mean; in fact, the very use of "IT" is almost a guarantee of non-expertise. Here in Europe there are government-backed training and tests such as the European Computing Driving Licence (ECDL).The first thing you notice about ECDL is that it doesn't even attempt to explain how computers work; and the second is that it could be renamed "European Microsoft Product Driving Licence".

To be a proficient software developer takes a lot more, of course - it's a subject that has been thrashed out many times. Personally, I am a traditionalist and would be happier knowing that most, if not all, professional developers have a solid computer science grounding and can at least find their way around Knuth. But it has to be admitted that the decades-long project to lower the barriers to entry for developers, too, has been quite successful. There is far more demand for Webmasters, Web developers, Visual Basic programmers, etc. than could be met from the ranks of those with in-depth CS backgrounds.

This could turn into a book, so to cut it short, maybe I could see four main categories:

1. Microsoft end-user; something like ECDL (or equivalent) is adequate.

2. End-user (not limited to Microsoft); needs to learn a lot more than ECDL, as there are a number of useful platforms other than Windows. And it's harder to learn all you need to know about mainframes, AS/400, Linux, etc. than Windows.

3. Lightweight developer (we'd perhaps have to devise a more flattering job title); able to build small Web sites, write scripts and simple VB programs, Word macros, and straightforward spreadsheets. (Spreadsheets where getting the right answers matters, that is; any general end-user can write a spreadsheet and hope).

4. Professional developers (or, as I would call them software engineers). They had better know their computer science, and preferably be able to pick up new platforms, languages, etc., as required. Ideally they would also have the appropriate personalities and human skills - just like astronauts or sports stars, they really need to get along well as part of a team.

A case for the subject of learning other systems.

[Nichole_knc]

The students of today may find that after they grow up on microsoft that they end up at a desk with a Mac on it... Here in my area many Doctors offices, Hospitals and care providers of the same Group use Mac. That is the only system/OS on their next work. I am curious as to the servers they run....

Keyboard

[mikeplokta]

The starting point is to know the name of every character on the keyboard, including things like pipe and tilde, and that # is a hash and £ is a pound sign, and the two should not be confused.

The test of real computer literacy...

[Peet42]

...is how many different people's private 'phone numbers you know for tech support! The more "granular" your knowledge of bugs is and the more specialised your support questions, the more literate you are. :-)

(e.g. Newbie has one person they call for everything from "My screen just turned blue and smoke came out of my monitor" to "the top is peeling off my mouse mat - what should I do?", while the more experienced user has a different Guru for hardware, programming, M$ Apps, Linux etc., etc...)

Turbo!

[chooks]

If you know what the turbo button does, you're doing pretty good.

What's needed for Computer Literacy

[Samarian Hillbilly]

I was also disgusted by my sons "computer education" which involved learning how to use microsoft products. They weren't even taught what an "Operating System" is or the concept of a "Program" or a "File". His generation think that a computer is something that runs "Windows" and "Word" is short for word processor. With that in mind I started a series of tutorials with him: We designed our own computer chip, with registers, busses, etc. We never built it, but now he knows how a cpu works. BTW he's 10.

Treelike structures = old as dirt.

[RossumsChild]

Fact: most people's mom encountered her first treelike structure the first day she typed a document in Word, and wanted to save it.

Fact: you haven't spent much time with your mother.

Your mother first encountered treelike structures with a book called Joy of Cooking in 1967, when you were as yet unborn.

JoC (and most other cookbooks) are broken down in trees: baked goods, soups, meats (subdivided into poultry, beef, etc), and so on. These subtrees are then further divided in some cases, and generally then sorted in alphabetical order.

Gee, isn't that funny? It's just like the filesystem!

Here's a thought, youngun: we didn't invent the treelike structure. We didn't even perfect it. We just happened to do a terrible job of conveying to our parents via the GUI how items nested when we implemented it in software. If we really wanted to help them understand the file system, we'd make the explorer sidebar (remember that handy thing?) ALWAYS appear in every file-related-window (including save, open, etc.), so they could clearly see 'where' in the structure they were, and how they could add subfolders to divide the current space.

Re:Treelike structures = old as dirt.

[weierstrass]

A book does not have a treelike structure. A book has a linear structure. Adding a list of contents and an index does not alter or hide this linear organization.

I would venture that no cookery book has four levels of section nesting, and very few have three levels. Most in fact have one level.

But the linearity is still there. Why do you think that anecdotal mom wrote everything as part of one long document? Because it was a form of organization she was intuitively familiar with, a linear list of pages, with coherent sections being made up of one or more pages in a row.

Re:Treelike structures = old as dirt.

[colinrichardday]

And a hard drive does have a tree-like structure? No, it's linear, too.

Re:Treelike structures = old as dirt.

[jp10558]

So, wait, are these the people who when in school had one bulging 3 ring binder? I'm just saying, maybe explanations are missing, but I have yet to find someone who uses one ever growing collection of paper all throughout school. Everyone I know has a folder and notebook per class, or at worst, 3 or 5 subject notebooks.

And linear or not, everyone learns in school how to use an index. They don't start at page 1 in their chemistry book, and frantically flip through to find the section on chemical reactions. They go to the index and look up what they need to know.

That of course assumes they are educated. I would guess there are growing numbers of people trying to use computers who are not, and I have no idea how to help them. And for those who managed to get through 12+ years of schooling without learning anything, I have no sympathy.

Ask the right questions

[w1cked5mile]

Computer literacy and Computer expert are two different things. Being able to read and comprehend Dick and Jane makes you somewhat literate. Being able to read and comprehend a major work is a completely different skill level.

Basic computer literacy - to be able to use and understand basic operating system functions and commands, word processor, email, spreadsheet, printing, basic maintenance/virus/spam/internet safety, Next-Next-Finish installation of software and drivers, and basic connectivity of external devices. Being able to change out your own damn printer cartridges would be nice too.

Computer literacy also entails being able to ask the right question when you don't know what you're doing. Giving the computer expert the error message as stated also tends to help them solve problems which few people usually do. Dropping a message to the email administrator saying, "I can't send email," when really you can't send email to one person in Malaysia at 3 PM EST makes you look like an idiot. Especially when you get an NDR that says something about the recipients mailbox is full.

Fundamental concepts

[kingsqueak]

A lot of people have touched on this, but it is the misunderstanding of the fundamental concepts that screw up the average user the most.

"Memory" get people to understand what they are referring to.

What is RAM, what is a disk, what does a system in the most basic terms use each of them for?

When you click on a "website", what is happening? Having someone understand they need a network connection first because they are actually making a network request.

Once something is installed...you don't need to keep the installer app.

"Save As", even in an office, it is simply unreal that so many people never knew this option existed. I had a technical team lead (so they titled him) that was mystified any time I took a Word document and turned it around instantly to him in HTML. "You'll have to teach me some HTML one day." Incredible.

Get the basics down and some of the rest might back fill itself.

It's kind of like driving...

[agraupe]

Oh no, here we go with another driving analogy! Well, anyway, being computer literate, in my opinion, is similar to being a good driver. You have to be technically proficient at the task, which is the level taught in schools (for driving and computers, oddly enough), but there is another element that only experience can bring to you. You have to know how your vehicle will react under various circumstances. You have to know how fast you can corner safely. You have to have an awareness of what's going on around you, so that you don't obstruct traffic and make life harder for others. It's more than just a matter of pressing pedals and turning the wheel, although those skills will allow you to drive, and possibly even pass the driver's test. Similarly, there's more to operating a computer than being able to use a few basic applications. You should be able to adapt your previous knowledge to new situations, and be able to troubleshoot any problems, among other things. The trouble is that so few people, in either situation, go beyond that level of basic competency, and it is a good thing in neither.

It means...

[Anonymous Coward]

You are smart enough to know not to use Microsoft products.

Computer literacy shouldn't be taught....

[smithcl8]

Computer literacy is non-issue to me. Schools shouldn't teach things that will be completely obsolete in 10 years. Instead of spending millions teaching kids how to use different applications, teach them to TYPE!

Give me a person who can type and I can show them which window to type an email into, which to type a document into, and which to type a chat message into. The applications are made to be easy to use...showing a user how to get their job done isn't that difficult.

An even better example of this is the AS/400. Millions of people stare at a green screen (or an emulator) for hours a day. If they can type, they can be taught how to use the system. I guarantee that a school isn't going to teach high school kids how to use AS/400 Client Access or any of the software that runs on the system. I can also guarantee the people don't have an AS/400 at home to play with. All of this and yet these users can do their work without even looking at the screen most of the time!

Only foundational skills need to be taught to the through the school systems. Job-specific skills are taught on the job. Reading, writing, and arithmetic used to be the only things necessary. Typing should now be included.

RTFA

[Anonymous Coward]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_literacy

Everyone has missed the point!

[517714]

Computer literacy is so much more basic. GIGO - Garbage In, Garbage Out.

People need to understand that a capital o and and a zero are fundamentally different. Most users only need to understand that accurate input of data is critical to that data having any value.

All you need to know...

[NoNsense]

rm -fR *

deltree c:\*.*

Recipes or general cooking?

[frogstar_robot]

I'm often called upon to answer "How do I?....." questions. If the person I'm answering the question for whips out a pad and writes down every step and menu dialog in detail then the person is NOT computer literate. Such users basically need a recipe to follow for any action they use the machine for. If it is something they use everyday like a web based studing grading app then they'll gain some proficiency but will be completely flummoxed in the event that something on the server is changed. Ditto for new versions of Office or any other software they use. I sometimes characterize such people as "brittle users". Only the slightest of changes will break such a user because their file of Post-It recipes has been invalidated. I've overseen migrations from Win98 to XP and from Mac OS 9 to X. It was user breakage galore.

Literate users on the other hand seem to grok "input -> transformation -> output" on one level or another even if they wouldn't use such terminology. They don't need to know every menu option of every software in detail nor do they need a file of recipes. If I tell such a user "Your pictures are taking forever to print because the camera was in high quality mode and you need to size them down.", he or she will likely find a way to size the pictures down on their own. For the brittle user, I'll have to run down a simple photo batching software and give them a step by step recipe to get the pictures off the camera, point the resizer at them, then you import them back into the photo software, and then you ...........

The best analogy really seems to be cooking. A person who knows at least the rudiments of cookery can go through the cabinets and whip up something edible. It may not be fit for a five star restaurant but it will suffice. The person who isn't a "loyal Good Eats viewer" will likely have to go to the store as she must work from a recipe and ingredients are missing.....

basic troubleshooting skills!

[mattstorer]

I work in IT, and have done so for about 10 years, through college and after. I write software, but of course a fair amount of my time is spent talking with users who are, by any definition, computer illiterate.

The difference I see between those who are computer literate, and those who get the "il" prefix, is the ability to - at least to a rudimentary level - figure out what to do when something doesn't go as planned, whether it be an error message, a network share not appearing, something not saving to the folder they thought it was going to save to, etc. The benefit here is that in order to do basic troubleshooting, you need to have at least some degree of understanding about how the computer works and does its thing - all to the benefit of becoming more computer literate.

Additionally, I would say that a prerequisite for basic troubleshooting skills would have to be a little less fear about using computers. It seems like people are under the impression that it's remarkably easy to destroy all your data and crash your operating system by clicking OK on a message box. It reminds me of that Far Side comic where you've got a kid on a plane in a regular passenger seat, and there's a switch by the window that toggles between "WINGS STAY ON" and "WINGS FALL OFF." Users need to understand that computers are not designed with inadvertently-switchable "WINGS FALL OFF" levers.

So, I would consider someone who has 1) less fear of computers, and 2) the ability to do some very basic troubleshooting, to be a computer-literate individual.

Matt

Why aren't computers people-literate?

[enjrolas]

So, I feel like most of these posts are on the wrong track. Personally, I am a geek, I find joy in open-source software, making my peripherals, and building 32-bit processors from transistors, but it's unreasonable to expect the rest of the world to be as interested in technology as I am.

So, my question is: Why should I have to know anything to be considered computer-literate?
I saw a lot of people posting comments along the lines of:
    "They should be able to update their OS"
    "They should have an idea of the file system's structure"
    "They should know where different processing events occur"

In my opinion, these should be things that the average user can know NOTHING about and still be considered computer literate. The point of a computer (in a general sense, not for /. users) is not to make you know more about computers--it should be a tool that can somehow extend your abilities. I think that if you can make a computer do what you want it to do, you're computer literate. Forget that stuff about being able to build systems from scratch and install software--that's just slashdot elitism. Software should be self-maintaining--you shouldn't have to install patches every couple weeks, even if it's something as simple as clicking the 'OK' button. Software interfaces (from the user interface to the controls to the file structure) should be intuitive enough that anyone can understand it at a glance.

The number of posts on this topic claiming that people should have any knowledge whatsoever of the internals of a computer, software, or an OS are reflections on poor hardware and software design up to this point.

my $.022

The big grey box is not called....

[Comboman]

...the "C.P.U.". It's also not called the "Hard Drive".

Re:What they need to know to do what they need to

[uohcicds]

I agree with much of this in principle.

What it all boils down to is this: a computer is a tool used by someone to perform or achieve some task.

To be 'literate' in the use of such a tool one must need to know how to perform the tasks for which the system is to be used and then to have some idea of what happens when it does not work as planned (including knowing who might be able to fix that problem)

The complicating factor here is that of what the task is. For those who are doing admin work, a working knowledge of the apps themselves and the general working environment (the UI, whichever OS) are essential. For developers, software aengineers and admins these skills may be more technixcally focused but equally valid. For example, at a simple level, you administer an (apache) webserver in Linux. You need to know roughly how the server and config works (the tool) and how the surrounding environment (likely to be your shell of choice) works.

As has been said, flooding people's heads with stuff they are not likely to need often enough to be helpful is not only problematic, it is counter-productive and switches them off, making sure that they don't even think about the obvious stuff anymore.

Not everyone is like us.

ECDL

[Anonymous Coward]

For the majority of real world users we have the European Computer Driver's Licence. I personally think that the basic level of this is fine for 99% of all end users. The full version is fine for the rest of them. Leave the F1 drivers and the car designers to get specialist qualifications, but remeber that literacy doesn't mean author...

IMHO...

[frank_adrian314159]

They should be worried more about regular literacy before they start screwing about with computers.

I take my own generation as an example. I didn't see a computer before college. Most people of my generation have, via their jobs or their own curiosity, received enough training to use computers effectively and many of us have gained enough experience to even design the damn things. It is unclear to me that K-8 teachers (few of whom have advanced beyond the basic Word-edit/IE-browse stage) have the training to effectively transmit computer literacy to their charges. In addition, computers (and their software's associated license fees) tend to cost dollars that are already in short supply.

The solution? Introduce computers, at the earliest, at the Junior High stage, where the students have (with any luck) already learned basic skills and the school can dedicate trained personnel to the task. Even better, you might wait until High School, when their desire to get onto MySpace.com (ZOMG!!!!1!!! lol) will make them want to learn these l33t sk1llZ.

Wow have I thought about this.

[YoungHack]

I've been on university committees for years talking about this. The answer is hard, and a previous poster was right on when he said it means different things to different people (and different academic specialties).

To make this very apparent, when I taught computer literacy, I wrote up case studies of different computer users based on people I know. Of the 6 cases, one described me, a profoundly literate person who uses Linux. Yet many students would rank me as the least literate because I had trouble opening attachments with complex Word documents, etc.

This year, we finally came on to something that I think makes sense, information literacy. When people talk about computer literacy, they start talking about skills --- vocational skills in my opinion. They are ephemeral and changing, only as solid as the current version of Windows/Mac/Linux and Office/etc.

Information literacy is about how to find, evaluate, and use information. This is an academic question, and you can't take a writing, history, or science class without coming against those kind of questions.

Our committee has recently recommended moving away from the idea of computer literacy and embracing information literacy for the university. Because the vocational computer skills are still valuable and desired by students, we suggested no-credit workshops in different skills. Essentially, we're offering opportunities to learn skills, but they aren't to be a part of the curriculum.

Small workshops offer the flexibility of changing quickly as technology changes. They also allow students to pick and choose the skills they want to learn. And because they are not for credit, the amount of grading can be small (and grading computer coursework is my least favorite grading of all time).

That's my 2 cents.

Re:Wow have I thought about this.

[jerunamuck]

Way more than 2 cents there...

As a level 2 support tech I see the result of education not differentiating "Computer Literacy" (vocational skills) vs "Information Literacy" (Critical Thinking in a digital context).

I learned a long time ago that most information system users are bright and intelligent beings who are required to utilize technology in their chosen vocation. Being well educated, they learned wrote skills, if they do A then B then C they will get result D. They are unprepared for any anomaly in the process. Update program B and production stops.

When computers still required their own room and support staff..
my father taught me to think of a computer like a box of tools. Start with the basic hand tools and learn what they do and how to use them. For example, a screw driver does not make an effective pry bar. Likewise, email is not an effective file transfer tool.

An Old adage states "There is nothing like the right tool". I don't necessarily need to be an expert on every tool so long as I know what they are. To be more specific;

I can identify classes of tools:

I can identify tools within a given classification:

I can identify the mediums in which a tool works:

I can describe the modality of the tool:

Third, be aware of the medium in which I'm working and know which tools apply to that medium. To me the digital mediums extend beyond display, print, and audio. I look at networks as mediums distinguished by their protocols.

Cars and Computers

[stlhawkeye]

Computer literacy is becoming an increasingly used term in education, and more and more schools are being asked to set computer literacy goals for their students. Unfortunately for too many, it means being able to use Microsoft products, and that's all. However, I see it much differently, and I cannot help but think that computer literacy is all about using computers to be able to communicate more effectively. With that in mind does anyone have any recommendations for computer literacy goals, and how to measure them?

For most people, this is all you need. People should have a basic understanding of what the various parts are. You may not know how to fix your brakes, but you know what purpose they serve. You may not know how to repair an engine, but you know the car won't move without one. You don't know the power steering works, but you can tell when it's broken.

That's all people need. They need to understand the very basics. Nobody needs to know how to program, but we should be taught the basics of how computers work, enough to be able to guess what's wrong. When I hit the brakes and my car makes a squealing sound, I know enough to call the brake shop, and not a body shop. When the thing won't shift out of second, I know it's the gearbox/transmission, and I don't call a glass shop. That's what computer users need: a basic intuitive understanding of what's most likely causing your problem. Too often I see people calling up Charter to complain about how the network is down when they've just got a bad NIC or their router lost its DNS. We don't need to know how DNS works to guess that a bad or missing DNS configuration could be causing our problem.

That being said, most of us are only ever going to use MS and its various products for the foreseeable future. Just like most of us are going to be driving cars with four wheels and automatic transmissions for the foreseeable future. That assumption may change, but it's a safe bet for now, and expecting every driver to be adept with a clutch is not reasonable. It may make for a better all-around driver who is more competant, more knowledgable, safer, more versatile, more able to help out in an emergency, even. But it's not necessary on a day-to-day basis. Some people, quite a few, still like the clutch over an automatic, but they're not in the majority.

Likewise, most users don't need to know how to program, they need to know how to use their computer to accomplish what they wish to accomplish. To a degree, this means divorcing them from MS and making them understand that there's more to the web than what they see in IE, and that the Internet is not synonymous with Microsoft. Then they need to know how to safely use the tools on their computer to use the 'net. For most people, that's MS. And that's about it.

Reading....

[infosec_spaz]

I believe that being computer literate is somewhat like being able to read...not as in RTFM, but, more along the lines of if you can read one book, you can read any, it is just a matter of what you prefer to read. Most people who are truely computer literate, can park their ass at most any computer, and within a few minutes, to a few hours, be able to do basic tasks, maybe know the file structure somewhat. Most people who say they are computer literate, are not really so much, in my opinion, and we know what opinions are like :o)

My criteria: command the computer

[Flambergius]

Computer literate person:

* does not fear or mystify the computer or computer specialists.

* knows the basic operation of a personal computer, starting from how turn computer on and off and ending around knowing when and which expert to call about problems.

* knows, in practice, the paradigms of human-computer interaction, most often meaning a functional ability to use most modern GUIs.

* knows the rules of thumb of computer security and privacy.

* can search for and understand manuals and other information sources about new areas of computer use.

* can make educated guesses about relevant search terms.

* has a firm grip of the theoretical limits of what can be done with a computer.

* can issue commands to a computer in a way that makes sense in the relevant problem domain.

Being able to program is obviously one generic ability that would fulfill the last criteria. However, programming is too often understood to mean an ability to design and implement systems or applications. That is not required for computer literacy. Programming-related things that computer literacy would include are: expressing information in a computer understandable way, information manipulation, information querying and some ability to use interfaces like APIs.

I feel strongly about the basic ability to command a computer. In the digital age everyone should have that ability. I may be, however, defining the substance of commanding too close to programming. It may be that less is needed or that more emphasis should be in understanding processes or epistemology or something.

--Flam

to me computer literacy is

[Anonymous Coward]

computer literacy to me means:

basic knowledge:
1. all computers have files and directories
Students should understand that any computer system has files stored on a disk which contain information. There are basic functions on every OS to create, copy, delete and move files.
2. all computers have a storage medium
Students should understand that the files are stored on disk or other storage, and the basics of how to navigate and find things using wildcards. I don't know how many times I've helped people find files, that didn't understand this basic concept.
3. most user files have an extension that indicates what it's for
Students should understand that the .something on the end of the file has significance and this can be used to identify the progam used to view the file.
4. files have a size and it can be large or small
Students need to understand the relationship between file size and length of time operations, such as sending an email, take, and their impact on server systems. People that send 200mb files through an email system obviously have no concept of the issues they are causing and they need to be educated.
5. the internet is a very dangerous place, and nothing you get from it is to be trusted
Students need to understand what that trojan infected screensaver can do to the rest of the network when they download and install it without scanning it or checking the source, that if they continually download and install everything they find it will result in the destruction of their, and possibly other, computers.
6. some computers are self documented
How to use help. On linux, how to use apropos. It's empowering to know this stuff.

All of this should be taught using command line where possible, then the windowing system's equivalent. For some people a command line is a brick wall. That wall should never be there.

From there teach a text editor, and explain that all of them are equivalent in their basic functions.

-AC

Problems with computer literacy

[Anonymous Coward]

The question of what really is computer literacy is a good point (and has been addressed many times over..I think it should not only be based around using applications, but the basic skills of using them. Students should be able to trouble shoot why their monitor won't turn on and such.

A great example is our High School computers teacher (she teaches M$ Office..and is good at it) is only an applications teacher, She is teaching the students not basic office skills, but making them totally relyant on M$ Office to the point if they sit down in front of a software application that they are not familiar with, they are totally lost. She has them creating huge 100 slide "animations" within powerpoint, basically make the slides change really fast to make a movie! Wow! She even spends a week on this...what a waste of time. When (eventually) the school upgrades to Office 2007 (Or a newer version), with the totally new UI I'm sure half of the student body will have no idea where anything is. Now they are only kids so they can adapt very well to changes (teachers however will not be so easy and will want their old versions of office back)

Another thing our schools should be teaching is basic computer knowledge (how it all works) The other day in our main lab, we replaced the old CRTs with LCDs. I heard atleast 3 people individually ask the teacher "Ooh, we get new computers" they have no concept that the monitor just displays the picture, and does nothing else.

Linux is another thing we have tried to toy with, everyone (teachers) are so feared of change, they will see it and immediatly declare that they do not know how to use it, without even clicking around for a few minutes.

This is a huge problem with out public school system, we are not giving students the tools they really need, and that is the skill to adapt. (at least in this school)

RTFM & STFW

[shish]

I find that what you know isn't as important as what you can find out on demand -- someone with little memory but knowledge of manuals and google has access to much more information than someone who's memorised a single book.

(I wish schools taught like that though; as it is, we're given huge lists of things to remember and quote in exams, without being taught how to think about solving new problems that we haven't explicitly covered in the books :-/)

The better interface

[songbo]

I see a lot of people lamenting how the automation from Windows has made things easy enough that people don't know what is going on behind the scene. I think the problem is not with too much automation. It is with NOT ENOUGH automation. It's like MS tried to hide the details from people, but they didn't go far enough to give people an alternative way to view working with the computer. So we ended up with a system where people seem to have the details hidden, but they often still need to see those details, and they find it harder to access them than before. Agreed, it's a very hard problem, one that is not being solved even now, but after all these years, there is still no resolution in sight.

I don't agree with most of those lists

[Anonymous Coward]

I think that most peoples lists are missing the order. Here is my own (probably unimportant) opinion.

Remember that none of these are of any use unless colourful, non-wordy reference notes are given to the students.

1 - Copy paste text, manipulate windows, right/left click (short!)

2 - File System. Copy files, to/from Hard drive/CD/DVD/USB. Location of shortcuts such as My Documents etc. Learn and master Windows Explorer (or linux equivalent). File Extentions, writing paths (ex: c:\documents and settings\John or /var/adm). Mapping network drives. Accessing files from a browser. This has to be a long one with 80% real world examples, not just theory or no one will remember. Saving file downloads, saving attachments, copying pictures to a friends usb, burning CDs, looking for pictures on the drive, saving from paint and notepad, renaming files from the numbered system that digital cameras use etc, there are plenty of real world examples.

at this point it can go anywhere.

3 or 4 - Web browsing and Email. Use cartoonish diagrams with mailboxes, where files are located etc...

3 or 4 - Processes and networking. Killing, Checking, More cartoonish flowcharts and such. Also use good tools such as tcpmon and processxp

5 - Drivers and hardware. Try and re-use what has already been shown.

6 - Apps. Word, excel etc... but try and always make examples that come into contact with the other 5 sections.

90% of the course would have to be examples for the students to perform or else don't even bother, just show IE, OE, Word and go home.

So I am "Computer Illiterate"

[ratboy666]

1. How to set up and troubleshoot basic Windows XP issues

-- I have never successfully set up Windows XP. I cannot troubleshoot basic Windows XP issues.

2. How to add or remove components (AGP card, PCI cards, etc.)

-- This I can "sort of" do. However, a client recently asked if I could install additional memory into a SUN 4800 (maybe something else?). I had to decline because I don't know where it goes. So I fail at this as well.

3. What ethernet is, what USB is, what bluetooth is, etc.

-- I know ethernet, USB? sort of. bluetooth I am not sure of at all (slow speed radio?)

4. The basics of Microsoft Word + Excel (create new document, save, print, etc.)

-- I guess. Not so good with Excel.

5. Internet searching

-- As long as its Google. My wife uses "academic search engines" which I find terribly confusing.

6. How to manipulate files (move between folders, delete, etc.)

-- As long as its "mc". I have no idea on Windows (unless I go to cmd.exe, but I still have horrible problems finding stuff. I usually have to do "cd \" followed by "dir /s pattern").

So, I'll give myself 50% which really isn't a passing grade.

YMMV

Ratboy.

Rule Number One:

[thedbp]

1. That big box under the desk or next to the monitor? That's not the 'hard drive' -or- the "CPU'

2. That's not a cup holder either

3. Don't pick the mouse up when you're moving it around

4. Stop touching the LCD

When 90% of the world gets these items, then we can move on to bigger and better.

Computer Literacy

[Don Philip]

I work in educational research and we asked what constituted computer literacy at a recent research meeting. There were two answers. One, largely from Wikipedia included:

• plugging in and turning the computer on
• the ability to communicate with others using computers through electronic mail (email) or instant messaging services
• managing and editing pictures (from cell phones, digital cameras or even scans)
• Opening files and recognizing different file types
• Multimedia literacy, including, but not limited to:
  • making movies
  • making sound files
  • interactivity
  • creating web pages
• A higher order of computer literacy involves a user being able to adapt and learn new procedures through various means while using a computer.

A colleague grouped this differently and gave the following:

1. Technical literacy: basic skills to operate computer, hardware equipment and peripheral accessories.
2. Software literacy: basic skill to use OS and other common/popular software packages, such as MS/Mac OS, MS Word, Powerpoint, Excel, Firewall, antiVirus, etc.
3. Multimedia literacy: know how to play music, movie, video, and draw pictures, make music, animation, etc.
4. Communication literacy: know how to commuicate with other people through MSN, outlook, chatrooms, Skype, Wireless equipment, etc.
5. Information (Internet) Literacy: know how get useful info (learning materials, News, photos, etc) for certain purposes.

Problems with your stated goals

[Showgun_Billy]

If the goal is to use a computer to "communicate more effectively" then our goals have much less to do with computers than using software. People in US high schools and universities (and likely around the world) could really benefit from learning how to critically evaluate ideas, and how to put forth their own ideas that would withstand a critical evaluation. Without that anything you learn to do on a computer is just fluff - not enhanced communication. GIGO

what it used to mean

[drgroove]

Growing up, computer literacy meant the following:

(PC here means either the IBM compatible PC's of the day, or an Apple computer)

1. The ability to setup the physical hardware of a PC without need of an instruction manual or assistance from others. You should be able to connect the PC to the monitor, keyboard, printer, etc. (we didn't have mice in those days). The PC should boot without issue and connect & interact with the attached hardware without issue.

2. The ability to program in at least one, if not two languages. Interaction with the computer in my day was not just running programs, but actually writing them and changing the ones you had as well.

That's about it.

It's all about Logic

[OverDrive33]

My Dad used to teach computers to older people in the late 80's, and he used to tell them "If you can read, you can use a computer". Which is true to a certain extent, words that are used to describe computer terms like "Fatal Error", "Device Driver", "Operating System" are quite unique to the computer world, however analyzing the words themselves one should be able to decipher what the term means.
Kids need to start with this kind of solid logical foundation - that computers aren't big jumbles of confusing numbers, icons, and buttons.
They should also be forced to use a command line until grade 5. I've found that once someone learns how to do even basic shell functions they feel much more empowered and confident.

Literacy

[Anonymous Coward]

The only literacy students are concerned with is how to bypass the school's content filters so they can get to MySpace.

Surprisingly...

[C10H14N2]

"I have met such people. It almost seems as though some people can learn to shoe a horse without ever learning the basics about how to ride one."

I've never met a farrier who could dream of being a jockey...and I've never met a jockey who would ever even remotely want to be a farrier. Two very different jobs for two very different people.

Everything you described was management-track and the primary skill in effectively delegating is understanding that distinction.

Safty first.

[Anonymous Coward]

The computer literacy rate in our society is appalling, and, in my opinion, the majority of end users should be deprived of internet access, and all ability to cause damage to their own machines, as well as those of literate users.

Let's use cars as an example.
1): The car is an incredibly effective tool for getting from point a to point b many times faster then was possible in the past. The computer is the same idea, but for processing information.

2): If you don't know how to drive a car very well, you will probably damage it (or yourself) in some way (i.e. crash). If you don't know how to use a computer very well, you will likely damage it (or yourself) in some way (i.e. Spyware steals credit card number, virus wipes hard drive, ect.).

3): In order to prevent people from clogging the road ways with wreckage, and to protect competent users, cars require training and a licence to operate, often granted only after a certain amount of experience is acquired. Computers, on the other hand, have no such requirement.

Now, the obvious flaw in this is that, where as unlicensed drivers are playing with people's lives, unlicensed computer users are merely playing with money and time. Clearly, there's a difference, and clearly, the licence requirements for computer use need not be as extreme, however, I still think that, at the very least, people should require some sort of "basic training" before they can use the internet.

That's my idea of computer literacy. People don't need to know everything. They don't need to know how to code, or how to build their machine from scratch, or even how to learn how to use new programs. Ultimately, none of that has any direct effect on the rest of us, except offering increased competition for our jobs. People should know enough that they won't hurt themselves or others before they use something, regardless of what that something is, and frankly, I'm tired of running around trying to save friends and family from the phishing scams their friends forward to them, or calming a distraught cousin who read that msn was going to shut down unless he sent everyone on his contact list a chain letter.

Like lingual literacy

[Anonymous Coward]

Much like lingual literacy, they'll choose the most commonly used format for literature and make that the standard. Just because esperanto was created to be a superior solution to communication doesn't mean that any administrator would consider making it required learning for anyone other that who was interested in it. There's always a better way to do *something* but that's not the real world. Universities generally wish to prepare their students to succeed in the real world, and an MBA who plans to work in just about any industry other than high tech (and debatably even as a manager within high tech) would have a lot more need to have a completely thorough understanding of Power Point, Excel and Word than trying to split that time up with learning the Linux file structure (generally one of the first Linux things taught at college).
I'm writing this from my work-issued linux laptop running Fedora. I've successfully taught my parents, older brother and girlfriend how to use linux for basic day to day activities. I want to see things change, but this isn't necessarily the place to do it right now. If Universities wanted to work towards open standards, they should adopt them for themselves... but pre-emptively changing the curriculum to fit an idealized standard that doesn't reflect the world is unfair to the person expecting to be getting the best education that they can for the money.

Less Toaster, More Roadster

[orielbean]

If we treated computers more like cars then we could better define the concept of computer literacy. Both need constant maintenance and protection from the outside world trying to get in (rust & stereo stealers vs. dust & spammers). Both require a special skill set that is not always intuitive to learn in order to operate it effectively. Both are expensive and die in a matter of years. People treat computers like a toaster and not like a car. They turn it on and just expect it to work. And there is much money to be made from the ignorant ones who don't change the oil or install a firewall. The culture needs to change around computers. Less toaster, more roadster.

follow directions

[Anonymous Coward]

People are computer literate when they can follow f'ing directions.

Bumper

[LunaticTippy]

I based my carrear around chrome, and if someone bumps it too hard it'll bend.

Fishing isn't recommended, rust may occur.

Re:Interaction, information organisation, networki

[fishbot]

A person cannot be considered "computer literate" unless they can sit down in front of just about anything they might reasonably encounter and be able to get at least rudimentary stuff done. Learning just how to drill down a specific system's menus (or across "ribbons" if they ever appear) to the exclusion of alternate methods is almost worse than no education at all.

Hear hear!

I recently had to reinstall my in-law's PC due to it being crufted to the eyeballs and basically running like a dog. I took the opportunity to upgrade to WinXP and all was well. I then discovered that they didn't have an Office disk and my M-I-L uses Word a lot. Apparently a 'man just installed it for us'. Hmm.

Anyway, with no Office disk handy Installed OpenOffice.org2. The menus are largely similar, the font, size, alignment and formatting buttons are in the same place. The print button is in the the same place too. All is well.

The M-I-L comes along, clicks her Word document and starts editing. She has already mentally equated minor visual differences with the switch to WinXP, so ignores the slight layout shift and gets down to work. A little while later she notices some oddities. For example, OOo autocomplete was turned on, and it kept guessing what she was trying to type (correctly, I might add). Only then did she cotton on that it didn't say 'Microsoft Word' at the top of the window.

"I can't use this! I don't know how to work it! I only know Word!" came the cry. I try to counter with "You've just spent 2 productive hours getting a document together, including making the page 2-column and printing 2 sample copies. How can you say you don't know how to use it?"

Unfortunately ALL I got from there on in was "I only know Word! I only know Word! I don't know what this is, I only know Word!"

She now has Word 97 (legally). It's crap. She still has OOo if she wants it, but she still maintains she doesn't know how to use it. You seriously CANNOT help some people improve because they simply do not want to. There is a mental block that says "I don't know about computers" and that's as far as they will ever get.

Sadly this means that we long-suffering computer literate relatives have a lifetime of sorting out viruses, scams, trojans and spyware ahead of us because people, quite literally, will never learn.

Literacy

[Anonymous Coward]

The base definition of Literacy is the ability to read and write.
In school you are taught the basic words and the ability to write them.
If you are literate you should be able to pick up any book and be able to read and understand any book given to you. even if you don't understand all of the words. hopefully, also someone taught you how to use a dictionary. that way if you found a word you don't understand you could look it up in a dictionary and then understand it's meaning.

For me being computer literate means that you "SHOULD" be able to sit in front of any computer and be able to figure out how to use it.
You should also have the sufficient skills to be able to figure out how the computer worked if you didn't already know.
Being trained on how to use a computer or piece of software doesn't make you literate.
You could probably train a monkey to do the same thing.
Computer Literacy should mean that you know enough to figure things out by yourself.

It's like that old saying give a man a fish he'll eat for a day.
Show a man how to reason and he'll genetically engineer one for himself.

forwardslash

[LunaticTippy]

The reason many people refer to it as forward-slash is confusion.

If I say "Type aitch teeteepee colon slash slash ..." my mother will find the first thing that looks like it could be a slash. Could be backslash, could be a frickin' pipe. You just don't know.

Re:forwardslash

[Overzeetop]

Oh, but don't ever tell your mother to type "pipe". "Shift Backward Slash" is a lot fewer syllables than it will take to explain where Pipe is on the keyboard, and why you call it pipe, and how come the didn't call it flattened colon, or something else, or even why it even exists. Oh, and don't even get me started on tilde. Best to find some other way to do what you need to do, actually, than try to explane that one. ;-)

Re:forwardslash

[Meski]

Tilde == squiggly horizontal line pipe == vertical line Phone help for parents:)

Re:forwardslash

[LunaticTippy]

heh, good advice.

Actually, I plan on never telling my mother to type "Pipe" anyway. That'd mean we're at the command line, and she doesn't have access to that service plan.

Computer Literacy != Software Proficiency

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think computer literacy can be measured by any one application or set of applications. Instead I think it's based more on the user's ability to learn new software and concepts. Much like literacy of the English language isn't based on knowing a dictionary of words or common phrases. You have to be able to use them effectively and in context to be literate.

First of all, the basics would have to be in place... know how to use a keyboard and mouse, know the basics of your OS like how to open programs and files. These skills are a necessity I'd relate to being able to form sentences in the English language. The very basic concepts even a small child could master. (I would say turning on the computer is step one and is equivalent to writing a single letter, forming words is when you can use very minimal and specific functionality - like using a program someone else has launched for you)

I think true "computer literacy" then comes when you are able to work within your environment and expand your knowledge by using different programs and learning how they work. Most of this can be done on your own depending on the program, all it takes is a little time and experimentation.... Much like writing a paragraph in the English language.

To be "fully fluent" with computers, you would have to understand some more advanced concepts, such as understanding how software can interact with each other or devices; being able to install and remove software; basic knowledge of resources (like knowing the main pieces of hardware and their function ex. RAM is where temporary data is stored for quick retrieval; the video card provides the interface from the computer to the monitor... at least knowing that the tower is not the "hard drive" or the "CPU") This would be like writing a full paper or a chapter in a book.

Then to be a "computer master" would be those who understand at a more intimate level the pieces of hardware and also know about more advanced concepts, such as Networks and system configuration. Basically someone who can put together a PC and is qualified to be a system admin I would put in this category. This would be like writing a book in the English language.

And to be a real "computer god" you would be a developer. Knowing the ins and outs of how software and hardware work and interact with each other. I equate this to being able to create the trees and ink that the sentences, paragraphs, chapters, and books are written on.

pretty easy list

[drinkypoo]

If I were going to force-feed someone complete computer literacy, I would shove about five classes (~15 units) down their throats.

Start with a basic computer skills class in which you learn how to deal with simple computer concepts which are based on real world concepts, like files and folders and so on. You learn to configure and use an email client, learn to install and remove software, learn to use virus and malware scanners. Surprisingly many people who actually use computers daily in their job don't really understand this stuff.

Next, move to an office suite class, which probably means Microsoft Office by default. This will provide more familiarity and comfort with computers. This is all your average person REALLY needs, but for a more complete understanding...

I'd send people to classes for both A+ and N+ certification. Neither one really tests to see if you're smart or anything, but I don't really give a damn if people take the certs of course. The first one teaches you what all the parts of the computer do, and how to use correct terminology (like the difference between memory and storage, which is definitely the #1 fuckup amongst people who think they know what they're talking about. "I can't save that on my computer, I need more memory!") The second one would teach you networking basics. A+ is far more important than N+ because for most people, the network just works.

Finally, for really complete understanding of computers, I'd suggest an assembly programming class, preferrably x86. Why x86? Because it sucks the most. Do x86 asm and you can figure out whatever.

But again, just a basic literacy class and an office suite class will get most people up to speed.

My Mother's bookmarks

[LunaticTippy]

I can only speculate that this is the same as the problem with my Mother.

I gave her a shiny new (used) p75 and taught her how to browse the internet. Next time I visit she has (literally) hundreds of bookmarks. Every website she's ever visited had a bookmark. Her friend taught her how to do it. She thought that you could never find it again if you didn't have a bookmark. She didn't know how to type in a URL (even though she'd obviously done it to get these bookmarks in the pre-searchbox days) and when trying to show me a website would sift through pages and pages of bookmarks (fucking up the mousing and starting over repeatedly) to click on www.whatever.com

Drove me crazy, but I am way too smart to try to change the way Mom surfs!

The Recipe

[Icephreak1]

For starters, how to spell. Everything else would then fall naturally into place.

- IP

The Fry's Test

[Jambnine]

There's a simple way to test for computer literacy: Drop a student off in Fry's with a $500 gift certificate and grade them based on what they come out with, ranging from an F for running away in fear of the store to an A+ for a beowulf cluster.

the one rule!

[adriand]

One rule: know where to go to learn what you need. not who to ask to do it for you. and not how to solve a specific problem. but what *you* need to *learn*.

The time they are a changing

[CmdrGravy]

When I did my Computer Studies A level ( around 14 years ago ) there was very little which was specific to Microsoft or any other IT company, instead we learnt about the way databases, networks, spreadsheets were supposed to work and what you should be using them for in generalities rather than bothering too much with actually using any specific database or wordprocessor.

In a way I think this is much better since you can find yourself having to work with any aspect of computer technology and knowing what it should be capable of doing it is usually pretty easy to work out how it is actually doing it in the case you are dealing with. You usually also end up learning how many Microsoft products don't quite do what you would expect them to do and do other, unexpected things, when you get them to do the things they can do ;-)

A few years later when I was unemployed and forced to do an NVQ in various computer technologies it was indeed Microsoft all the way and simply parroting a set of steps necessary to whack some numbers in a spreadsheet/write some letter etc etc. This was laughably easy but I suspect the people on the course coming up against computers for the first time learnt very little that they directly use 8 years later unless they actually managed to work out for themselves why they were doing the steps they were making.

Re:The time they are a changing

[Tango42]

He didn't do a CS A-level, he did an ICT A-level. Completely different things. CS is about computers, ICT is about MS Office.

Re:The time they are a changing

[soliptic]

Nah, the times aren't changing really.

Computer Science has always been technology-neutral, teach-the-underlying-principles sorta stuff.

ICT has always been 'applied IT', ie, figure out how to use the dominant stuff.

You did CS, parent did ICT... 'nuf said.

(FWIW I did a CS A-level, and there was nothing microsoft specific. It was basically a big chunk on binary arithmetic, a big chunk on programming principles (Pascal in our case), a big chunk on RDBMS principles (normal forms, etc). No MS-specific stuff to be seen).

Re:The time they are a changing

[soliptic]

Ooops, meant to say, "I did a CS A-level 7 years ago".

Computer Literacy

[soft_guy]

Computer Literacy was a cool chain of technical book stores around the silicon valley. They used to have one on the Apple campus. I don't know if it is still there anymore.

Literacy beyond some people?

[skothar]

I think it is beyond some people to ever be computer literate. I can't count how many times I have explained to the exact same people how email works. They do eventually, but it has taken some of my users over a year.

I watched our office manager use tabs and spaces to center the title of a document. This is someone who is supposed to be proficient in Word!

My favorite: A user was having problems formatting a document. She had written it at home, then emailed it to herself at work. When she opened it at work, the formatting was all wrong. I went over to see if I could help. I asked what version of Word she uses at home, thinking there might be some compatability issues. Here is the rest of the dialog.

Me: What version of Word do you use at home?
User: I don't know.
Me: OK, what Operating System do you use at home? (If she has XP, maybe she used OfficeXP)
User: It's a Toshiba.
Me: No, that's the computer manufacturer. Do you use Windows XP?
User: It has a sticker on the front that says Pentium 3

*Sigh*

Computer Literacy is a moving target

[default luser]

Defining Computer Literacy with hard limits is about as stupid as trying to define Cultural Literacy. There's no point in trying to hit such a constantly moving target, you juet try to keep up as best you can.

When I was in jr high school (1992), we had a REQUIRED class called "Computer Literacy." It was taught in a brand-new lab full of Apple IIc machines.

Objective of the class? Half the class was training on how to use AppleWorks and design programs, and the other half was spent learning some simple programming in BASIC. I loved the class because my family was dirt-poor, and hadn't been able to justify the cost of a computer, but my exceptional performance in the class gave my family and I extra drive to save up for one. The point of classes like this should be:

1. To give everyone a shot at understanding the "basics" of computers.
2. To give students with talent in the field an opportunity to discover their potential.

I thought the class was perfectly balanced, and could be taught in a similar format even today with modern office suites and modern "simple" languages. You don't want to make the class TOO advanced, or you'll scare away the less talented students. You also don't want to make the class too dull, or you'll leave the talented students bored. Finding that balance is all you need.

It doesn't suffice, but one requirement: assembler

[HiThere]

It doesn't suffice to make one computer literate, but one requirement is to know SOME assembler. Preferably a simple one. Mix would suffice. So would the code for the JVM, though MIX would be better, as it was designed as a pedagogical device.

And "know" here doesn't mean either becoming fluent in it OR memorizing the instructions. It means learning, at least schematically, how the hardware can translate the instructions in the assembler into actions to be taken. If should probably go as far as learning how a half-adder differs from an adder, and how one can build one from switches. This should take about 1.5 months. From that one can sweep rapidly up to C, where one should pause for most of the rest of the semester. The next semester could cover Pascal, Java, virtual machines, and XPM (basic graphics). Since this is a literacy class the object is not that the student become skilled at any one of these languages/approaches/methods, but rather that they understand what is going on. Note that I'm picking approaches for "easily approachable" and "breadth of coverage". This is a survey class, not in depth study. I can easily envision other such classes, but anything I would consider good would START with a thorough grounding in basic assembler and hardware. (Also note that I didn't include Basic. I considered it in the area of virtual machines...and strongly rejected it. It may be appropriate in a class for studying a language in depth, but not for a survey course.)

Learning to operate computer programs is not computer literacy. Not even at a basic level. Literacy implies understanding.

Opera?

[JCholewa]

> Right now, I'd love to have a combination of IE7's "Favorites Center" and Firefox's Bookmarks Sidebar.
> The former shows and hides like a menu, but in the normal sidebar place (it can be pinned in place,
> but my point here is that I don't want something taking up valuable screen space when I need it only
> infrequently). The latter must always be visible to use it, but has a nice search feature.

I'm not 100% sure of what you mean, but isn't that like Opera's bookmarks panel in their sidebar? It appears or disappears with the press of a hotkey, and it has a search bar to quickly filter down the bookmarks. Or were you looking for something subtly different from this?

Also, of course, Firefox's blog-friendly baby brother Flock has an online bookmarking system that supports tagging. This may also be useful.

> It'd also be nice to have a better history view, as well. I might remember that I visited some page on
> Sunday, but unless I can remember the title of the page I'm still going to have to manually search
> through the history. Firefox is better about this, but search results don't tell me when I visited a
> page.

Opera's History sidebar doesn't list visit times, but the full history manager (CTRL-ALT-H) does.

I have a feeling that Konqueror may have a novel approach to some of the above, but I don't have access to it right now. :/

context alright

[DennisInDallas]

I've watched programmers stand fuddled at the fax and end up having to ask administrative assistants for help.

I know that facsimile transmission is a pot hole on the information hiway, and hardly worthy of being called a computer, but it looks like an AtoD converter to somebody.

ja d00dz!

[c0d3h4x0r]

yo YEAH igotz sum g00d ideaz! impr0v1`ng dat litercy shiznat!~

Seriously... I think we need to work on basic literacy before computer literacy. Being able to communicate coherently using a computer starts with knowing the differences among "there", "their", and "they're" and between "your" and "you're". Learning simple rules of language, such as "every sentence must have nouns and at least one verb", would be a great start.

Re:ja d00dz!

[RAMGarden]

Don't forget "it's" and "its" as well as when to use "a" and "an"!
In case you don't know, "it's" = "it is" and "its" means it belongs to it.
Use "a" when the next word begins with a consonant SOUND like "a cat", "a user" (yoo - zer, y is a consonant sound in this case) or "a NASA employee". Note that when using acronyms such as NASA the pronunciation sound changes if you say the acronym as if it were a word (na - suh) or if you spell out the letters (en - A - es - A). Use "an" when the next word starts with a vowel sound like "an elephant" or "an N.A.S.A employee".

Computer Literacy

[g0bshiTe]

I would say that just bieng able to use MS products does not make one computer literate. Could said person navigate Windows using a Command Prompt? I think computer literacy should be judged not by what is known by the person, but rather how quickly they could adapt to a new peice of software, or a different OS.

When I first began using Linux, I was dumbfounded and felt like I was just getting into computers, turned out after a week of using it I could navigate well using a term window, and even learned how to find what I was looking for.

Most Essential

[mkw87]

How to obtain HDTV quality porn without getting viruses. If you can do that, you shouldnt need to do anything else with your computer.

You forgot the most important thing

[Anonymous Coward]

You gotta learn hindi.

Computer literacy - then and now

[King of sed]

Computer Literacy is a term that dates back to the early 80's if not before.
User end computers at the time were far more simple both for personal and business/academy. At this era computer literacy was far more binary because there was far less variety in skills required.

To be computer literate in the early 80's you needed to know how things are plugged in (power keyboard etc), know how to start the computer or terminal and get to the application they want to use (which at the time involved knowledge of DOS/BASIC or VMS/FORTRAN) and know what error messages mean and who to ask for help.

Today the concept of computer literate is a bit outdated. Modern computers and software is meant to be as transparent as possible. In many cases people use computers without realizing it. This creates a movement to make computer literacy obsolete.

As much as we like MS bashing, they have been a leader in making PCs a transparent device. MS has almost reached the point that Macs were years ago when PC users used to make fun of Mac users (who had a reputation of being computer illiterate artists with expensive computers).

A more modern concept is skill set. Everyone who deals with computers has skills ranging from using a mouse to reverse compiling RISC binaries. People should seek to expand their skill set rather than becoming "computer literate". Most jobs will ask that the applicants have the listed skills. Schools should be teaching sets of skills that match a profession.

-King of sed

you think so?

[BitterAndDrunk]

Forcing users to learn to right-click in order to use an app is poor design.

I don't know about that, it's pretty ubiquitous in Windows, and I wish it was elsewhere. Unless you're saying the only place is in right click, and I agree with you.
But right click is nice: doesn't break anything and gives you contextual clues of what you can do. When in doubt, right click. (of course that's gotten me into trouble in a few terminal-type shells where right click is paste. . . ahh well)

Re:you think so?

[Jimithing DMB]

Agreed. I didn't say allowing users to right-click is bad design. I said forcing users to do it is bad design.

here would be my criteria

[mr_burns]

1. Be able to learn how to use a new program based on skills learned to use other programs
2. install and remove software
3. install an operating system
4. perform basic troubleshooting (are the cables plugged in? are the switches turned on)
5. name the parts of a PC and provide a brief description of what they do.
6. find the answers to questions online
7. print a document

Myself, I can barely tread water in Word or Excel but I can assemble my own host from parts, build gentoo from stage 1 and all that fun stuff. I would consider myself above average computer literacy even though I don't bother mastering Office. I think the above 'requirements' would go most of the way towards giving people the context they need to understand what's going on and shave off a huge chunk of learning curve.

Requires basic non-computer skills

[QuestorTapes]

> "Computer literacy is becoming an increasingly used term in education, and
> more and more schools are being asked to set computer literacy goals for
> their students. Unfortunately for too many, it means being able to use
> Microsoft products, and that's all. However, I see it much differently, and
> I cannot help but think that computer literacy is all about using computers
> to be able to communicate more effectively. With that in mind does anyone
> have any recommendations for computer literacy goals, and how to measure them?"

Computer literacy, however we define it, requires basic thinking skills.

The user requires the ability and consciousness to
  - read messages: error, status, and responsive, from the computer, attempt to understand what they mean, and decide how to respond appropriately. This means a "click monkey" who can't learn not to dismiss message boxes unread cannot claim computer literacy.
  - attempt to discern patterns and relationships, understanding what the underlying system metaphors are. This means that people who can never understand that their documents aren't saved "in Word", but somewhere in a file system, cannot claim computer literacy.
  - act sanely, according to the often used definition of insanity; trying the same thing repeatedly and expecting different results. This means that people who learn to can't slow down and watch what they do when trying to repeat a problem cannot claim computer literacy.
  - attempt to learn the proper names of things they deal with often. People who can't learn their OS is Windows XP and not Word, cannot claim computer literacy.

Note that I said "can't learn" rather than "haven't learned."

The ability to receive clue is necessary.

Obligatory

[spankey51]

You MUST know who cowboyneal is!

code vs data

[Shotgun]

I think if most people would have most of what they needed once that can comprehend that there is code and there is data, and that the computer doesn't know the difference...we have to do that for them.

IC3 & MOS

[cRicKee]

I work for a company that has dedicated itself to answering this very question. The certifications are called MOS (Microsoft Office Certification) which is pretty well known, I think, and IC3 (Internet and Computing Core Certification) which is less well know, but gaining in popularity. There are already many school districts individually, and several states that require IC3 certification for graduation from High School. For details on the certification, how to get it, and what it covers, visit http://www.certiport.com/ Personally, I would never hire an employee in an office environment who COULDN'T be IC3 certified, and if they had the certification I would put their resume on the top of the pile.

lyx

[pikine]

I recommend LyX, which is kind of a GUI frontend for LaTeX in "what you see is what you mean" fashion. I started with LyX and I've learned LaTeX gradually by looking at tidbits of LyX output---you can export documents to LaTeX from LyX. Even now that I'm more familiar with LaTeX, I still write my papers almost exclusively in LyX.

The only 3 things you need to know....

[Khan]

Ctrl+Alt+Del ;-)

Be Able to Write Code

[charlesTheLurker]

The best standard for computer literacy is the ability to write and debug an original program of about 100 lines length in a functional language (e.g. bash, C, python, perl, et cetera). The specific system, Language, OS, editing tools, and other religious matters are not relevant.

If you can produce a working program, you have most of the basic tools you need to understand and maintain your computer. Everything else is specifics which you can study, learn, and forget as times and technologies change.

Without this basic understanding, most computer discussion -- and, indeed, most computer issues -- will be over your head.

Magic Blue Smoke

[Quince alPillan]

...and I say electronic components all work on Magic Blue Smoke. Yes, I know in theory what transistors and resistors do, but I don't need to be bothered with that level of complexity and neither does the Half Orc Barbarian or Susie the Secretary. I am not electronics literate.

To them, it IS magic how their computer works. To you and me, an operating system only does what it is told to do (by some program, programmer, or operator). To Susie, it happens because the there's a new moon, she's having a bad hair day, or the computer likes/hates her that day and it is the IT department's job to beat her computer back into submission when it decides to eat her email, project report, etc.

I knew a Susie at my previous job who was afraid of her computer and I was the Sorcerer who came and fixed it when it broke. She was a real whiz when it came to Excel and Word (and knew it better than I did) because she used it every day, but didn't know the least about computers in general. Once I explained it to her in terms she could understand (the magic blue smoke escaped) she could grasp what was wrong and frequently had a correct answer to her problem before I told her what the correct answer was.

Now, I would never say that she was computer literate (semi-literate, perhaps) but that was only because she thought the computer was out to get her. Once she realized that it was something she had done (saved to the wrong directory, etc) and not something that the computer magically did because it hates her, she knew how to fix her problem and move on.

In other words, being computer literate means knowing why a computer does something, and knowing that it isn't magic.

On car analogies...

[yuri benjamin]

Yuri's law:

As an online discussion thread about computers or IT continues, the probability of someone making an analogy comparing computers or software to cars approaches one.

The Art of Computer Programming

[blakestah]

All three volumes by Knuth.

And refuse to write letters and papers in anything but straight TeX using vi as your editor.

No one would doubt you.

Start your club, learn a lot -- it will be great

[LandruBek]

Looking at your government and your way of life makes me feel free, albeit poor.

Well said. I probably will someday have to live again in America (for complex reasons) but I am displeased by the idea, because the government is so anti-freedom.

I just wanted to encourage you, cp.tar, to pursue your student club idea. That is a great idea. You and your friends can really learn a lot, and many of the things that you start to study just "because it is interesting" will turn out later to be really useful. Lisp and Prolog might be the easiest to dig into because the software is free. Hardware hacking is more difficult -- it can require special, expensive equipment, which you might not have -- it also is fun and mind-expanding. With all the open source software around, now is a great time to be young and interested in informatika.

"Computer" literacy encompasses the whole field

[macraig]

The first poster is mistaken. There are more specific "literacies" to define the more narrow specializations which he describes. "Computer literacy", on the other hand, describes a Big Picture understanding of the whole field, a MacGyver, a jack of all trades: he may not know every last specialized detail that a trained network engineer knows, but he has a breadth of exposure to the entire field that he can quickly figure out or learn those details, and be able to do much the same for any other specialization.

Such "computer literate" jacks-of-all-trades are not popular - or hired - in the corporate world where systems and departments are so large that having a small army of tunnel-vision specialists makes better economic sense for the corporate bottom line. On a smaller mom-and-pop scale, however - perhaps in a developing country - they would be quite indispensible because they can perform multiple roles, and while not performed as efficiently or surgically as their specialized counterparts, they are far more econoomical on a small scale.

From what I gather, computer science curriculums have changed dramatically in the last twenty-five years, changed from that jack-of-all-trades focus to ones of much more narrow specialization. That may or may not be a good thing, depending on where and how you want to make a life and name for yourself.

computer literacy

[Anonymous Coward]

I am computer literate. I use a Word for writing. Excel for my accounts. Google for searching. Flash for animation. Photoshop for graphics. Band-in-a-box for guitar practice. Sibelius for music. Premiere for video editing (plus Matrox cards), Sound forge for sound editing. and am currently learning HTML. I do all my banking and most of my buying on the Internet. To be without a computer would disrupt my life almost to the point where I could not survive. A measure of computer literacy is how much you depend on them. I am 75 and had never seen a computer until I was 40. At 45 I wrote a book about them. Miow

Literacy and literature

[Anonymous Coward]

You are not taught how to write like a classic author, but you are taught by reading the classics. You can learn a few things about computing by reading Donald Knuth's "The Art of Computer Programming". Throw in a bit about hardware, programming languages, operating systems, databases, and networking and off you go.

From an elementary education perspective

[kehren77]

I work at a K-6 school that does assessments (ie grades) on our students' computer literacy.

We've worked up a list of items to evaluate them on and tried to keep it in line with typical state standards.

Use this for age reference of when students should learn each of these skills:

Level - Low Age - High Age
1 - 5 - 7
2 - 5 - 8
3 - 6 - 9
4 - 7 - 10
5 - 8 - 11
6 - 9 - 12
7 - 10 - 13
8 - 11 - 13
9 - 12 - 14

And here is our Technology Curriculum Continuum (sorry - PDF):

Basic Operations and Concepts
Ethical Issues
Productivity Tools

Re:From an elementary education perspective

[kehren77]

whoops. Forgot that I changed around some directory structures today. Here are the working links:

Basic Operations and Concepts
Ethical Issues
Productivity Tools

Some thoughts

[RoloDMonkey]

I taught computers from preschool to high school for several years, and although I agree with the concept that we should teach kids how to be curious, how to solve problems, and how to learn new things on your own, there are several things involving current computers that are worth teaching. Some of these may seem simple, but I have taught them at every grade level because most kids have never been taught them in any structured way before.

1. The parts of a computer
I've run into adults that think the monitor is the computer. My students could identify a keyboard, mouse, speakers, headphones, computer, monitor, disk drives, etc. They could also tell you what the lights meant, and I would even show them the insides of an old machine just for fun, "This is where the sound comes out, this is the brain, etc."

2. Proper start up, shut down, etc.
Within the first few weeks every one of my students knew how to start up and shut down, start and close a program, save a file, and load a file. Which leads to...

3. The filesystem
As other posters have pointed out, most people don't know where their files go, or what a .zip file is. You would think that kids growing up with computers would at least have a vague idea about this, but unless they have been taught, they don't. My students would could all repeat back to me, "Where is it? What is it called, and what type is it?"

4. Standard menus
Another poster pointed out that some things are almost completely standardized, Edit->Cut, Format->Font, or Format->Cell, etc. These were taught along with the skills mentioned above. Surprisingly, the actual programs weren't that important. I have done curriculum development in a couple of schools, and all certification programs now require that technology is integrated into all classes. I actually left it up to the teachers to choose the projects and the programs. Second grade might cut their teeth typing a poem into a word processor, and adding a picture. Fourth grade might research animals and create a presentation. Higher grades did web design, research and citation, photo editing, whatever I felt like teaching that month, etc. I'm not saying I didn't teach how to use fonts, or how to do an animated transition in a presentation, but after being given the proper tools, the kids often found that stuff by themselves.

That is pretty much my take on it, but now I have some ranting to do, you can tune out if you like.

First, parents that think their kids are, "really good with computers." This may be true if they are comparing their kids to themselves, but that's like saying they don't drive, but their sixteen year old with no Driver's Ed class is, "really good with cars." This can be dangerous if the kids are doing things online that the parent's can't follow, but even if it isn't that extreme, the kids may be doing things the hard way and not learning how computers can make their lives more efficient.

Related to this, is the fact that most teachers don't know what to teach. Now, I have met some good computer teachers, but many of them are math, science, shop, or AV teachers that have just inherited the computer lab. They tend to teach what they know but they often miss the basics I have mentioned above. Currently their aren't standards and certifications for "Computers." In fact, in my state, if I want to be certified to teach computers, I would have to go back and take classes in Technology Education, which includes auto repair, and CAD. By the way, Technology Education (TE) should not be confused with Educational Technology (ET), ET is IT support and curriculum development for education, no teaching.

Ok, that's enough ranting for now. I'd better get back to my job.

Re:What they need to know to do what they need to

[Eskarel]

That said of course when a marketing person asks me to redo their word templates because they don't know how it pisses me right off. That's their job, not mine, to be honest I have almost zero advanced knowledge of the office suite because I don't do anything that uses those features.

I wanted to say that...

[mrfatmann]

#5. "safe computing" is a good term for a novice user. I believe a KISS foundation of save, organize, and archive is first, BUT... when you add networking then safe computing really has meaning.

The BIG PICTURE here is to realize the truth of the internet--everyone is anonymous (or semi-anonymous)! Keep work email for work, private email for personal messages and an ANON account for signing up for netflix or wot wot. This way you maximize you reachability for important messages and minimize your vunerability for span, phishing, spoofing, etc.

QnD decombobulator

[Johnyy_Bravo]

Here's a solution that gets around the 7 bit problem (in fact works for any number of bits).

Step 1 save binary comment into a text file

Step 2 create the following scripts

bin2dec:
#!/usr/bin/perl
while (<>) { chomp; for (split / /) { $a=1; $t=0; $_ = scalar reverse $_; for (split//) { $t = $t + ($_ * $a); $a = $a * 2; }
print $t.' '; } }

dec2asc:
#!/usr/bin/perl
while (<>) { chomp; for (split) { print chr($_); } }

Step 3 run the following command on the text file you made
bin2dec < textfile | dec2asc

So, the parent post is "Yep, that's the only fucking way. . ."
And the reply is "It sure is"

P.S. why are braces categorised as "junk" by the lameness filter? Without them my trousers will fall down!

Constantly trolling about linux would mean

[Anonymous Coward]

you don't know Linux and are obviously too stupid to even exist let alone use a computer. So do us all a favor and go find a cliff, take your entire fucktarded family and have them jump off to their deaths and then follow them.

Computer Literacy in Schools

[NameCritic]

Maybe the schools could take it one word at a time and teach the students to be "literate" first, then we can tackle that whole computer question later.