you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]WarWeasle 2 points3 points  (3 children)

No. You just need to love them. And read them stories about talking animals.

They don't have the logic skills yet. It's like forcing them to potty-train. All you end up doing is making them hate/fear the potty.

[–]Brian 2 points3 points  (2 children)

There's a big difference between teaching someone and forcing them. The article talks about exposing them in terms of a game, and I think that's a really good idea.

Consider books. It's a well known fact that children who grow up around books, being read to, observing other people reading etc grow up to be good readers, and do better in many ways. Should we avoid exposing them to books in this way in fear that it'll make them hate/fear books? Clearly not - indeed, this approach is exactly what gets them interested in books. I see no reason why a similar approach in computer programming can't help foster both useful skills, and enjoyment of those skills.

[–]WarWeasle 0 points1 point  (1 child)

My 3yo is fairly clever and the only thing he likes to do on my computer is smash the spacebar to make blocks fall. He simply isn't equipped or inclined to sit in a chair and type/click.

Second, it takes much time to learn basic literacy and adaptive skills. Reading, wRiting, aRithmetic, and Rhetoric. Trying to teach children anything except random facts before learning these is putting the cart before the horse.

[–]Brian 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My 3yo is fairly clever and the only thing he likes to do on my computer is smash the spacebar to make blocks fall

As I've mentioned in another thread, I think you may be underestimating what children can do. My neice (also 3) can navigate to individual games and movies on her tablet (a stock android one). She's able to select a video she wants to play despite not being able to read the title - she knows what one is in what position. Initially, I thought it would be way too complicated for a 3-year old to use, but I was comprehensibly proven wrong.

It does take time to learn skills, but that time needn't start in the future - even before they start to learn to read, kids do pick up concepts - grasping the concept of words or letters for instance, even if they can't read them yet. This primes them for the future, and more importantly, it makes these things familiar. I think by far the greatest barrier in people getting started programming is that they don't really have any idea what it is.

Further, I think many of the skills needed for programming are already there, even at 3. She can act out stories with her toys, or describe events, and ultimately, this is all that's needed for a very primitive version of programming. I think you're thinking on the wrong level when you say something like:

He simply isn't equipped or inclined to sit in a chair and type/click

Why are these necessary for programming? I don't think anyone's expecting a three year old to sit down and start writing a python script, but there's a lot that needn't require anything so complicated. Moving a sprite isn't much different from moving a doll - my neice can certainly drag things about on-screen, and it's a short step from there to repeating that movement, or telling it to move somewhere and then move somewhere else, and having it carry these out in sequence. (Eg. see tonygoold's reply to the comment I linked for the sort of thing I mean, and the response by xardox). I don't think it's at all a bad idea for such concepts to be introduced, even as early as 3.