Teach(.)"Moved non-related post to a new thread"<Moderator Response below>.
 

Teach programming
 

Hmmmmm ...... So you are advocating teaching teaching to 7-12? or do you mean teach programming to all high school students? Just clarifying. If it is teaching programming, what about those who have no desire to learn programming even though they are quite academic, do you want to force them to do a subject they have no desire to do? Wouldn't they be better off doing subjects they would use to help society?

Programming as an elective is good, although we force useless stuff to kill their will already why not logic? And, yes teaching teaching to 6-18 year olds would help society(’s-sad but true most think they born on continents only).

nationsonline.org/oneworld/continents_map.htm

I only asked because it is a struggle to understand what you are posting about most of the time and I thought some clarification of your post may help me understand you a bit better. Now you have replied it seems to me that you have never been in control of a classroom of mixed ability kids. Teaching kids how to learn is what school education should be about. Anyway I fail to see what this has to do with the FSF so I wont respond to you again on this off-topic matter.

It's hard to fully understand anyone\or-thing because we cant see it from infinite angels+...
I have said hu to many of your posts in the past...

And, FS is about Freedom and Education.

:) yes very cryptic, but they do tell you to read between the lines ;)
They should be "streamed" on ability, or in better terms "skill set"

Difficult to do as I believe most Adults in the Education system are blinkered by their own "skill sets"
Disagree,
I think *all* kids have an inherent ability to learn, you can't teach 'it' to them.
Instead it is the job of the education system to employ various teaching models, each model suited to particular 'sets' of kids. Trouble is, this is likely expensive, albeit in the shortterm, and I don't believe all teachers are "up to the job" being 'fixed' in their ways and failing to understand students/people with differing communication styles.

tldr;
"Teachers" need to learn how to teach, kids already know how to learn.

First things first can a mod seperate these off-topics please to a new thread.

between the lines of what?

In an ideal world yes but this world is far from ideal. When you have a class of 25 kids spread across 4 grades it is impossible to stream on ability let alone skill set. Why? they are all in the one class. The best you can do is give them work just above their comfort zone.

Some are, some aren't. Saying most is a blanket statement that may not be factually correct.

You disagree but only "think" *all* kids have an inherent ability to learn.

Let me put it another way for you. All kids have an inherent ability to learn but teachers bring that ability out. Now that ability may be brought out by parents, family, or professional educators but they are still teaching the kids how to learn.

I agree with the first part but not with the second. If the second were true the first would not be needed because they would already know how to do it. Why? because if the second were true you could give a kid a book and without them having any prior knowledge or further help they would be able to learn how to read by themselves. Unfortunately it just doesn't happen that way. Likewise if the second were true everyone would just know what to do within minutes and without any help from anyone else. People don't learn if they are in a social vacuum, kids (and adults) need others to share experiences with, teachers share the experience of learning (and good teachers target the developing learning styles of individual kids). Teach kids methods (of learning) and they get the facts for themselves, teach them facts without having already taught methods (of learning) and they may know 2 + 2 = 4 because it has been drummed into them and they believe it but they may not be able to display how they know the fact.

*They* and we also suppress it. Why do you think (the "fact" is) 2 is the best age to\for learning?

Moderator Response
 

Moved non-related post to a new thread <Teach programming>.

Did you READ?

note their sig
Nope, the statement is true, and will be until I change my mind.
I do, they may not learn what you want them to learn, but they are still learning.
I will however admit that I have left out very specific groups who have blatently obvious learning difficulties.
or not, depending on how you look at it
Kid already knows how to learn, they need to be engaged in learning.

Hate quoting wikipedia, but here is a definition of learning
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learning
You and I seem to have a different understanding ob what the ability to learn is.
You can't teach someone how to learn,
You can show then how to exploit resources

They don't learn the skills required for a social existence, but they may learn to survive.

They do not teach the ability to learn.
Good teachers engage, in an adaptive manor

Show they how to exploit resources, and yes they can learn for themselves.
Might not be what you want them to learn.. but hey.
You can't teach facts. you present them and memory/recall is not learning.
2 + 2 is irreverent here.


anyway, going off topic over semantics.

back on topic

It is my belief that all students should be introduced to as many 'fields' as possible at as early an age as possible, programming being one of them.
Obviously there are limits to the range and level, and it should be fun ( all about engaging them )

http://www.raspberrypi.org/ for the win.

looks off topic ( Eduction ) , but I only watched a few min.

Got to say Bill's opening "..the original vision of Microsoft, that we had a dream what software could do with infinite computing and infinite storage.."
Sure explains a lot of the 'bloat' and 'out of memory' stuff ;)