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.
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.
It was an absolute nightmare, for the simple reason that the documentation, like so many OSS projects, was extremely lacking, verging on non-existent. I went to their wiki and found a page with the perfect title, something like "which functions are handled in which classes", but it just said "coming soon". To their credit, when I asked on their forums I got a quick and friendly reply, but still, I think it illustrates my point.
I can sympathize with you, I am currently supporting some pages made with Smarty and the first time I looked at them, I couldn't even tell which file was opened when a page was requested. However I do need to ask a question. After all your research and getting "a quick and friendly reply," did you bother to go back to that wiki page and put in the answer to your question? I think your story "illustrates" your point more than you realize.
The Yakuza are respectful. On an episode of The Simpsons when one of them accidently came flying through a window, he bowed before heading back out to rejoin the gang fight. He could have just killed everyone in site, like ninja's sometimes do, but no. He took the time to show the respect and bow. The're sweeties! [sic]
If Chuck Norris had been thrown through a window, just bowing would have killed everyone in the room!
One thing I always like to do is look at code while it is scrolling across the screen. As the summary mentions, The Matrix used Linux code. In the latest version of The Hulk the code scrolling across the screen was C syntax node defintions (node *head = null; etc.), probably for a linked list. I don't think that's the level a biochemist would be working at. In the newer version of The Italian Job the code looked like 3D coordinates for CAD or Maya, probably the special effects guy just grabbed the nearest thing that looked like "real code."
Damn, I forgot the underscores, it should be chance_of_lying = HIGH;. Sorry about that, and if you are about to tell me that I forgot the brackets, I would suggest you hesitate.
Maybe it demonstrates how many negative things I have read about DRM, but I couldn't help but read DReaM, as "D-Ream", not "Dream". Did anyone else read it this way?
Your new here aren't you? Or, do you remember last year?
You should be on your knees, thanking $god_of_choice for "pink poneys" [sic for the clue impaired].
It is surprising to most people, but some of us can't see 3D illusions. I remember watching some horror movie (Friday th 13th or Nightmare, I don't rember which) in 3D in the theater, everyone was screaming, and I asked my date, "Do you really see things coming out of the screen?" She said, "Yes." All that was happening to me was that I was getting nauseous. Later, the same thing happened in one of those curved IMAX theaters that are supposed to "feel" 3D. I ended up having to close my eyes or get sick. My father has the same problem.
It's funny, because I have perfectly normal depth perception, and I don't normally get motion sickness. I love sailing, and perception-dependent sports like dogeball, volleyball, skiing, and driving. A good percent of people have this problem, and our brains cope with the missing perception with other visual cues. We just can't see most 3D illusions.
If you have read the article, the newspaper responds to this argument by stating that they were given a username and password to access the confidential information by an inside source. Therefore they argue that they did not commit the crime. Although the source may have commited a crime, the PA shield law already protects a newspaper from being prosecuted for using confidential information. Therefore this should be treated no differently than if someone had smuggled confidential paper files out of a government office.
If you learn political ideology from the Daily Show, you are an idiot.
I used to joke that I got all my news from
The Daily Show,
Doonesbury,
and The Onion, but it's not really true. I actually do learn things from these, but mainly I like them because I am well informed about the news.
My alarm clock is set to
NPR
at 6:00 a.m., and I continue to listen to it during my commute. I read at least the headlines in my local paper and the
New York Times every day, and of course, I read Slashdot obsessively. At least for me, the reason I love shows that make fun of the news, like The Daily Show, and
Wait, Wait, Don't Tell Me is because I am liberal, intelligent, educated, and informed.
On a side note, and totally seriously, I'm not trying to troll, can you recommend a conservative pundit that isn't an idiot? For instance, I read the comic strip
Prickly City
which seems to me to have a conservative slant. Sometimes it aggravates me, but I keep reading it because sometimes I agree with it, and sometimes it's worth it to see another person's point of view.
All I know about conservative pundits is O'Reilly, and Limbaugh. I agree that it's not worth it to listen to idiots. I think Al Franken took the wrong tack by trying to bring his views to their level. So, I would like to see conservative arguments presented intelligently, even humorously. Maybe I would enjoy them too.
Bloggers tend to link to the work of real reporters, then offer comments, or worse, just repeat rumors as fact. At best, they are information scavengers, feeding on the facts hunted down by others.
Trying playing the sound with Windows Media Player. On the simpler sounds, the visualization is flat. It appears the sounds are outside the normal range of music or speech.
Game budgets have risen to the same ballpark as movie budgets, but, for console games, there is no alternative analoguous to independent films.
I have to disagree with this one point. With current, web-based development environments like Java, Shockwave, and Flash, which include 3D rendering libraries, it would be possible to create the game equivalent of an independent film. Alien Hominid made it from the web to the console, others could to. In fact, consoles as we know them are disappearing anyway. The PS3 and the XBox 360 are being touted as multimedia machines. In the end the console will be the PC, and vice versa. In a race to claim the PC, phone, and the entire entertainment center the winner will be the first "console" to bring the price of an SDK down to the price of Visual Studio.NET, or lower.
I feel that I must weigh in on this. I have been thinking about game AI for a long time. When a player says he wants better AI, he may not even realize what he is asking for.
I'll tell you what I want. No, I don't want a real life game where you can be killed arbitrarily, but I do want a game where the enemies are more "realistic."
What I mean by "realistic" is two things, and he touches on both of these in the article. First, immersion, and he explains this very well so I won't elaborate on it. Let me jump on the ledges, explore behind the house, and solve the puzzle any way I please.
Second, I want an enemy that has an agenda and a timeline. Let's say that I am told by a villager that the Dark Lord(TM) is heading for the Good Guy Temple(TM) to burn it to the ground, and then I decide to spend an hour wandering around the countryside fighting wandering monsters to level up. Well, when I show up, that temple should be burned to the fucking ground, and then the game should go on. I'm not saying there shouldn't be times when I can explore and experiment, see the part about immersion above. But, when the plot moves it should move, and keep going. If the Dark Lord(C) is collecting the Shards of Power(R) and he gets one before me, then he is going to store it somewhere, and it is going to be harder to find. If spend way too much time powering up, my enemy should get more powerful too.
Now, I understand that making a branching plot thread would be challenging, but I don't think it would be impossible. Developers spend millions on games now. They could throw some of that money at a few code monkyes that could come up with the logistics. Or maybe they can go the Neverwinter Nights route, and let obsessed fans create the modules. Some of those are awesome.
When I was playing Tales of Symphonia, it was so Final Fantasy VII formulaic that all I did was make sure I was sufficiently more powerful than the wandering monsters. When combat started, except for the boss fights, I would turn on the auto-combat, and then go get a snack. The AI was so bad, it couldn't even beat itself.
Also, I know some people wouldn't enjoy a game that was too challenging. Difficulty levels should be revamped to resemble cheat codes. If I am in Godlike Destructor Mode(Q), I should be able to rampage across the country side destroying my enemies and the landscape, and only get hurt if I am stupid. Maybe I just want to blow off some steam. On the other hand, if I am in I Will Never Have a Girlfriend Mode(@), I want to be consistently challenged. If I spend weeks building a powerful character, the enemies should at least scale up to a percentage of my power. I shouldn't ever be able to put the game on auto-pilot.
In fact there should probably be two scales: Power Level and Challenge Level. Power Level would range from Hobbit(LOL) to Super Sayan(RSVP), and the Challenge Level would be more like the traditional difficulty level. That way I could mix it up. If I wanted to play a character that has to sneak around because I have trouble defeating an orc, I should be able to. If my character is capable of blowing up a planet, I should decide if I can commit mayhem almost unchecked, or if my enemies can pulverize moons also.
Again, this would be challenging to program, but not impossible, and some of it is addressed by offering entirely different games to different types of players. However, as the ability to create larger and more complex worlds evolve, developers are going to have to give some consideration to letting people play the game the way they want to play it, if they want to generate a large marketshare.
According to a post under TFA by the owner of the site, he didn't do this on purpose.
Posted by: kj at May 25, 2005 12:35 AM
I want to thank JenSense and others for posting this thread.
Thanks for the comment Air Charter. I just got off the phone with two different tech writers explaining why I would have a meta redirect on my site.
It isn't an attempt to profit from either Google's page rank or some cloaked affiliate link.
I am no hijacker. In fact, I'm not sure how I could in any way benefit from this link.
The simple fact is this: I write and syndicate articles all over the web. I used to put into those articles direct links to sites I was talking about.
A couple years ago I had a problem when I had written and syndicated several articles about GoTo.com when they changed their name to Overture. There were dozens of websites to notify and ask them to update the links in my articles.
So I decided to begin using meta refresh redirects rather than listing the URL's directly. I can then keep the links current in all the articles I write.
Hopefully Google will look at this and decide to make some changes so this won't occur. It's hard to believe I got a number 1 listing without trying.
Having the windshield go opaque blue is actually an old idea...
"Joo Janta 200 Super-Chromatic Peril Sensitive Sunglasses have been specially designed to help people develop a relaxed attitude to danger. At the first hint of trouble, they turn totally black and thus prevent you from seeing anything that might alarm you."
Slashdot Mirror
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 .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?"
As other posters have pointed out, most people don't know where their files go, or what a
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.
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.
I can sympathize with you, I am currently supporting some pages made with Smarty and the first time I looked at them, I couldn't even tell which file was opened when a page was requested. However I do need to ask a question. After all your research and getting "a quick and friendly reply," did you bother to go back to that wiki page and put in the answer to your question? I think your story "illustrates" your point more than you realize.
If Chuck Norris had been thrown through a window, just bowing would have killed everyone in the room!
Oh no! I'll bet node *head = null; is in SCO's code. Are they going to sue me now?
One thing I always like to do is look at code while it is scrolling across the screen. As the summary mentions, The Matrix used Linux code. In the latest version of The Hulk the code scrolling across the screen was C syntax node defintions (node *head = null; etc.), probably for a linked list. I don't think that's the level a biochemist would be working at. In the newer version of The Italian Job the code looked like 3D coordinates for CAD or Maya, probably the special effects guy just grabbed the nearest thing that looked like "real code."
No, but some AC felt compelled to point out my mistake.
I wrote:
if(posts_to_slashdot && has_girlfriend)
if(girlfriend.has_sensibilities)
chance_of_lying = VERY_HIGH;
else
chance of lying = HIGH;
He wrote:
Please, if you _must_ write funnycode, write _solid_ funnycode.
My reply:
if(posts_anonymously && criticizes_funnycode)
chance_of_girlfriend = NONEXISTANT;
Damn, I forgot the underscores, it should be chance_of_lying = HIGH;. Sorry about that, and if you are about to tell me that I forgot the brackets, I would suggest you hesitate.
if(posts_to_slashdot && has_girlfriend)
if(girlfriend.has_sensibilities)
chance_of_lying = VERY_HIGH;
else
chance of lying = HIGH;
Maybe it demonstrates how many negative things I have read about DRM, but I couldn't help but read DReaM, as "D-Ream", not "Dream". Did anyone else read it this way?
Your new here aren't you? Or, do you remember last year? You should be on your knees, thanking $god_of_choice for "pink poneys" [sic for the clue impaired].
P.S. Mod me up.
It is surprising to most people, but some of us can't see 3D illusions. I remember watching some horror movie (Friday th 13th or Nightmare, I don't rember which) in 3D in the theater, everyone was screaming, and I asked my date, "Do you really see things coming out of the screen?" She said, "Yes." All that was happening to me was that I was getting nauseous. Later, the same thing happened in one of those curved IMAX theaters that are supposed to "feel" 3D. I ended up having to close my eyes or get sick. My father has the same problem.
It's funny, because I have perfectly normal depth perception, and I don't normally get motion sickness. I love sailing, and perception-dependent sports like dogeball, volleyball, skiing, and driving. A good percent of people have this problem, and our brains cope with the missing perception with other visual cues. We just can't see most 3D illusions.
If you have read the article, the newspaper responds to this argument by stating that they were given a username and password to access the confidential information by an inside source. Therefore they argue that they did not commit the crime. Although the source may have commited a crime, the PA shield law already protects a newspaper from being prosecuted for using confidential information. Therefore this should be treated no differently than if someone had smuggled confidential paper files out of a government office.
I used to joke that I got all my news from The Daily Show, Doonesbury, and The Onion, but it's not really true. I actually do learn things from these, but mainly I like them because I am well informed about the news.
My alarm clock is set to NPR at 6:00 a.m., and I continue to listen to it during my commute. I read at least the headlines in my local paper and the New York Times every day, and of course, I read Slashdot obsessively. At least for me, the reason I love shows that make fun of the news, like The Daily Show, and Wait, Wait, Don't Tell Me is because I am liberal, intelligent, educated, and informed.
On a side note, and totally seriously, I'm not trying to troll, can you recommend a conservative pundit that isn't an idiot? For instance, I read the comic strip Prickly City which seems to me to have a conservative slant. Sometimes it aggravates me, but I keep reading it because sometimes I agree with it, and sometimes it's worth it to see another person's point of view. All I know about conservative pundits is O'Reilly, and Limbaugh. I agree that it's not worth it to listen to idiots. I think Al Franken took the wrong tack by trying to bring his views to their level. So, I would like to see conservative arguments presented intelligently, even humorously. Maybe I would enjoy them too.
It looks even better here.
Trying playing the sound with Windows Media Player. On the simpler sounds, the visualization is flat. It appears the sounds are outside the normal range of music or speech.
I have to disagree with this one point. With current, web-based development environments like Java, Shockwave, and Flash, which include 3D rendering libraries, it would be possible to create the game equivalent of an independent film. Alien Hominid made it from the web to the console, others could to. In fact, consoles as we know them are disappearing anyway. The PS3 and the XBox 360 are being touted as multimedia machines. In the end the console will be the PC, and vice versa. In a race to claim the PC, phone, and the entire entertainment center the winner will be the first "console" to bring the price of an SDK down to the price of Visual Studio .NET, or lower.
I feel that I must weigh in on this. I have been thinking about game AI for a long time. When a player says he wants better AI, he may not even realize what he is asking for.
I'll tell you what I want. No, I don't want a real life game where you can be killed arbitrarily, but I do want a game where the enemies are more "realistic."
What I mean by "realistic" is two things, and he touches on both of these in the article. First, immersion, and he explains this very well so I won't elaborate on it. Let me jump on the ledges, explore behind the house, and solve the puzzle any way I please.
Second, I want an enemy that has an agenda and a timeline. Let's say that I am told by a villager that the Dark Lord(TM) is heading for the Good Guy Temple(TM) to burn it to the ground, and then I decide to spend an hour wandering around the countryside fighting wandering monsters to level up. Well, when I show up, that temple should be burned to the fucking ground, and then the game should go on. I'm not saying there shouldn't be times when I can explore and experiment, see the part about immersion above. But, when the plot moves it should move, and keep going. If the Dark Lord(C) is collecting the Shards of Power(R) and he gets one before me, then he is going to store it somewhere, and it is going to be harder to find. If spend way too much time powering up, my enemy should get more powerful too.
Now, I understand that making a branching plot thread would be challenging, but I don't think it would be impossible. Developers spend millions on games now. They could throw some of that money at a few code monkyes that could come up with the logistics. Or maybe they can go the Neverwinter Nights route, and let obsessed fans create the modules. Some of those are awesome.
When I was playing Tales of Symphonia, it was so Final Fantasy VII formulaic that all I did was make sure I was sufficiently more powerful than the wandering monsters. When combat started, except for the boss fights, I would turn on the auto-combat, and then go get a snack. The AI was so bad, it couldn't even beat itself.
Also, I know some people wouldn't enjoy a game that was too challenging. Difficulty levels should be revamped to resemble cheat codes. If I am in Godlike Destructor Mode(Q), I should be able to rampage across the country side destroying my enemies and the landscape, and only get hurt if I am stupid. Maybe I just want to blow off some steam. On the other hand, if I am in I Will Never Have a Girlfriend Mode(@), I want to be consistently challenged. If I spend weeks building a powerful character, the enemies should at least scale up to a percentage of my power. I shouldn't ever be able to put the game on auto-pilot.
In fact there should probably be two scales: Power Level and Challenge Level. Power Level would range from Hobbit(LOL) to Super Sayan(RSVP), and the Challenge Level would be more like the traditional difficulty level. That way I could mix it up. If I wanted to play a character that has to sneak around because I have trouble defeating an orc, I should be able to. If my character is capable of blowing up a planet, I should decide if I can commit mayhem almost unchecked, or if my enemies can pulverize moons also.
Again, this would be challenging to program, but not impossible, and some of it is addressed by offering entirely different games to different types of players. However, as the ability to create larger and more complex worlds evolve, developers are going to have to give some consideration to letting people play the game the way they want to play it, if they want to generate a large marketshare.
Hah! You're the first person I know that's realized what my sig means, congratulations.
According to a post under TFA by the owner of the site, he didn't do this on purpose.
Having the windshield go opaque blue is actually an old idea...
"Joo Janta 200 Super-Chromatic Peril Sensitive Sunglasses have been specially designed to help people develop a relaxed attitude to danger. At the first hint of trouble, they turn totally black and thus prevent you from seeing anything that might alarm you."
I think this comic from Dork Tower says it all.
A moose bit my system once...