Mark Guzdial at ACM (Association of Computing Machinery) writes:
I have three reasons for thinking that learning CS is different than learning other STEM disciplines.
- Our infrastructure for teaching CS is younger, smaller, and weaker;
- We don't realize how hard learning to program is;
- CS is so valuable that it changes the affective components of learning.
The author makes compelling arguments to support the claims, ending with:
We are increasingly finding that the emotional component of learning computing (e.g., motivation, feeling of belonging, self-efficacy) is among the most critical variables. When you put more and more students in a high-pressure, competitive setting, and some of whom feel "like" the teacher and some don't, you get emotional complexity that is unlike any other STEM discipline. Not mathematics, any of the sciences, or any of the engineering disciplines are facing growing numbers of majors and non-majors at the same time. That makes learning CS different and harder.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday January 11 2018, @01:52PM (4 children)
Except that it's supposedly iterative where next time you can take oh, $900, then $1500, then $2500, etc. That's what exponential means. But there's only $1000 to take and only so much that you can get me to give up before it just doesn't happen.
My lack of planning is not a lack of fairness nor am I an infinite resource. Even if you grew wealthy enough to exploit every kid on the planet with an expensive medical condition, you're only going to get so much. And at that point, you're out of luck, if you want to expand "exponentially" further.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 11 2018, @02:40PM (3 children)
Well, if you are going to be a pedantic about it, then 70%, 85%, 92.5%, 96.25%, 98.125%, 99.0625%, etc. would be an exponentially increasing share. (share ratios of 2.33, 5.66, 12.33, 25.66, 52.33, 105.66 to 1)
Good way to miss the point though.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday January 11 2018, @03:04PM (2 children)
Ratios are not shares. It's sloppy language in a sloppy argument.
(Score: 2) by Pav on Sunday January 14 2018, @12:45AM (1 child)
So what does an exponentially increasing share of eg. the world economy mean to you then?
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday January 14 2018, @05:00AM