realbasic-nug
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: "You're not going to learn how to program in BASIC any more"

To: realbasic-nug at lists dot realsoftware dot com
Subject: Re: "You're not going to learn how to program in BASIC any more"
From: kkemp102294 at netscape dot net
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 22:36:49 -0400
Delivered-to: realbasic-nug at lists dot realsoftware dot com
References: <20050929161235 dot 4882ADD72CA at lists dot realsoftware dot com>
The first requirement for learning is to create an interest in the subject being taught. If your daughter is not interested in programming then she probably will not learn to, or not learn it well.

I have been teaching my 8 year old son how to program using RB. I initially found something he was interested in, and created a program for him to see.

I showed him the different components I used (ie. editfield, statictext, pushbutton, and timer) to create the program. He has taken this little program I had created and made additions and modifications to suit his liking. He is currently working on making a calculator because he has learned using the language reference in RB that all of the math he is learning RB can already do.

I absolutely believe learning a real programming language is the proper aproach.



realbasic-nug-request at lists dot realsoftware dot com wrote:
Subject: Re: "You're not going to learn how to program in BASIC any
more"[OT]
From: "Joseph J. Strout" <joe at realsoftware dot com>
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 08:47:26 -0600

At 9:00 AM -0400 9/29/05, Mary E. Tyler wrote:


I have been pondering recently, teaching my 10 year old daughter to
program. I have been trying to think of what development environment
I should use. I am leaning away from RB because of the graphical
underpinnings. Learning how to program a UI before learning how to
solve problems is putting the cart before the horse. Ah well... I
can dream.


My nephew (who's 11) is learning to program now.  He's using
REALbasic, but he's mostly working with console apps.  This is easier
to understand, as the program has a more direct and obvious flow
(start, input/output, end), and it also avoids the graphical layer,
as you mention.

Perhaps that approach would be useful for your daughter too.

I have a book on my shelf called "Introduction to Computer
Programming: BASIC for beginners" (by Brian Reffin Smith, (c) 1982
[1]).  The cover proclaims "No computer needed" and sure enough, I
learned from this book in third grade, before my family had a
computer.  It's a wonderful book, with topics presented in a useful
order, and lots of examples that are mostly only a handful of lines
long, yet do something interesting.

I often wish there were a book like this today.  I also wonder
occasionally about what we would do differently in a product geared
primarily at kids, and to what extent REALbasic could be adapted to
that purpose.



__________________________________________________________________
Look What The New Netscape.com Can Do!
Now you can preview dozens of stories and have the ones you select delivered to you without ever leaving the Top Home Page. And the new Tool Box gives you one click access to local Movie times, Maps, White Pages and more. See for yourself at http://netcenter.netscape.com/netcenter/

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>

Search the archives of this list here:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>