Re: [Ada] made me hate programming

[Georg Bauhaus <rm-host.bauhaus@maps.futureapps.de>]

On 7/2/10 12:11 AM, (see below) wrote:
> On 01/07/2010 23:00, in article
> 4c2d0fec$0$6877$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net, "Georg Bauhaus"
> <rm-host.bauhaus@maps.futureapps.de>  wrote:
>
>> On 7/1/10 8:54 PM, (see below) wrote:
>>
>>>> language profile that disallows overloading.
>>>
>>> So you lose Ada.Text_IO and all the arithmetic operators?
>>
>>
>> I'd be using a different library.
>
> What about +_*/ ?

Later. There are only integers now.

>> One use case is when output should
>> be as simple as possible. I learned that working with just
>> digits seems to be a good way to get started with programming
>> in Ada. [...]
>
> I think this is all totally unnecessary.

OK.

>> Is it possibly good instructions that have made it unlikely
>> for students to stumble into advanced features?
>>
>> Does good teaching require a good understanding
>> - of the independent features of Ada
>> - of the independence of features of Ada
>> - of how to combine them and when?
>
> In other words: a good knowledge of Ada, and a good understanding of
> effective teaching methods? Of course. How could you think that that might
> not be the case?

Experience has made me and others think, that generally,
statistically, teachers are not language experts and not
teaching experts (some of them, see below). They nevertheless
(must) act as language teachers and this is the fact from
which to start.

One inevitable problem with teaching quality is generated
by a contradictory moment in the life of many university
teachers, as is cautiously mentioned here and there:
at the time you prepare for being a doctor,
you start being a teacher already.  But, in general, there
is no formal education that could have introduced you to the
subject of teaching, only good will and attempts at informal
advice.
Reason: PhDs are several years older than others who
study to become a (school) teacher, yet they would have to
study the very same subjects.  But do PhD candidates and
first year students sit in the same room? Unthinkable.
Even offerings made especially for PhD candidates seem to
pose a threat ... whatever it is that PhDs fear when they
are supposed to learn how to teach. Maybe it is status inconsistency.
(This is from some Australian teaching association IIRC,
but the observation is not restricted to the continent,
I think.)

>> An then, when a teacher has different assorted backgrounds, picking
>> up the language of the day because that seems required, has he/she
>> got a chance to see all this clearly?  And to form instructions
>> accordingly?
>
> You'd have to ask them.

They simply cannot see things the same way an expert sees them.


> The design of Ada can hardly be held responsible for subjecting students to
> incompetent or untrained teachers.

The suggestion is to start from the design of Ada, as is,
and not change it a bit.  Have experts create profiles
that help countervail any venial incompetence on the part of
teachers.  The latter is a fact.  One can point at teachers,
say some truths about how good or bad a language is taught at
some school.  Sure, but it seems easier to equip Ada with
optional, field-tested teaching profiles.

We cannot run tools that create different teachers as output,
but we can have compilers that optionally offer guidance as
to which features of the language to include in teaching at
this or that stage.

The task, then, is a valid survey.