Re: Ada as the language of first exposure

[agate!spool.mu.edu!uwm.edu!linac!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-stat e.edu!elephant.cis.ohio-state.edu!weide@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Bruce Weide)]

In article <1992Nov1.171219.606@seas.gwu.edu> mfeldman@seas.gwu.edu
(Michael Feldman) writes:
>
>Why do I still go to SIGCSE and see teachers' jaws drop when they discover 
>that Ada, that huge dinosaur of a language, can run on PC's? (I'm not kidding,
>folks! Those myths are alive and well in the heartland!)
>

Speaking from/for the "heartland" of the US, we bloody well DO know
that Ada exists and runs on PCs :-).  Those folks must have been from
the coasts.

>I've got a constructive idea. This newshroup has a lot of readers in
>government and industry. I'll bet EVERY ONE of them has a college or
>university within, oh, say, 10 miles of their home or office. Suppose
>each person invested, say, half a day carrying Ada materials - book lists,
>compiler blurbs, etc. - to the nearest school. Would it be worth the
>investment of time? Would your supervisor approve? Am I a Pollyanna
>to think that maybe somebody would do it on his/her own time?
>
>OK, folks. Shoot it down. Let's hear what's wrong with it :-)
>

This is a fine idea, Mike, for some schools.  But I should hope that
some schools would consider Ada (or whatever) as a language not
because local industry demands it, but because it is superior in some
sense as a pedagogical vehicle.  For CS1 I'm having difficulty
justifying Ada over, say, Pascal or (what we use) Modula-2.  Some
people like to see students learning one language and paradigm well.
Others like to see more variety.  Both are legitimate positions, IMHO,
depending on local circumstances (faculty, mission, political
situation, etc.).  So even if Ada is "right" for later courses it
might not become popular in CS1.

For CS2 and beyond it's a lot easier in principle to justify Ada on
pedagogical grounds.  For example, we (among others) have been trying
to make industrial-strength component engineering (a.k.a.  "design for
reuse") a theme throughout a set of CS courses.  We have had some
success in teaching these ideas using Modula-2, and I think we know
how to do it better with Ada.  (We are planning some pilot studies.)
The key is not to set students loose with a CS1/CS2 text that covers
lots of "interesting" language features.  It's to concentrate on the
fundamental problems of component engineering and reuse and to provide
DEMONSTRABLY GOOD EXAMPLES of components and some JUSTIFIABLE
METHODOLOGY for good component design.

In my experience, CS1/CS2 books in general -- not just Ada-based --
are sorely lacking in this area.  This is not surprising: Most were
not intended for this purpose.  My point is simply that all the
teaching materials needed to make GOOD USE of Ada in a CS2 course, for
example, are NOT in place yet.  They aren't in place for Pascal or
Modula-2 or C or C++ or whatever, either.  But at OSU, at least,
changing languages is not something one takes lightly, and there must
be a darn good reason to do it or it just won't happen.  That's why
we're working on developing some of these missing pieces before
jumping to Ada.  All in good time...  It would be a shame to have some
of the driving forces behind us give up too early!

Cheers,
    -Bruce