TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

Kids don't need tools for kids

109 pointsby martyalainabout 3 years ago

27 comments

bla3about 3 years ago
When I was a kid, I wanted to write games. I wanted to use the same techniques that &quot;real&quot; games used, not some dumbed down &quot;for kids&quot; thing. I disliked everything that stressed ease-of-use and instant gratification and I liked everything that looked like it was written for professional use. In hindsight, this probably wasn&#x27;t the smartest decision.<p>But it did lead to me learning C++, DirectX, OpenGL, 3d math, and so on. And I did end up in a place where I&#x27;m more or less paid to do what I did for fun back then.<p>Also, the learning process taught me frustration tolerance, which is a very useful skill to have in the industry, and which many others seem to lack.
评论 #30674579 未加载
评论 #30672762 未加载
评论 #30672823 未加载
评论 #30673327 未加载
skadamatabout 3 years ago
The whole movement around &quot;teaching kids to code&quot; has been interesting to watch. Multiple goals seem to be conflated together (which isn&#x27;t uncommon in education):<p>- Helping kids think in new ways<p>- Building skills for &quot;the future&quot; &#x2F; &quot;jobs&quot;<p>- Encouraging kids to create their own things, instead of just consuming<p>- Probably some others I&#x27;m not thinking about! (e.g. improving odds of getting into an &quot;elite&quot; college)<p>Each tool, whether it&#x27;s C or Scratch, should be evaluated against the design goals as well as the embedded context &#x2F; environment that children are introduced to programming in. This is a rich topic undoubtedly.<p>My 2 favorite starting resources are:<p>- Learnable Programming by Bret Victor: <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;worrydream.com&#x2F;LearnableProgramming&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;worrydream.com&#x2F;LearnableProgramming&#x2F;</a><p>- Mindstorms by Seymour Papert: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.amazon.com&#x2F;Mindstorms-Children-Computers-Powerful-Ideas&#x2F;dp&#x2F;0465046746" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.amazon.com&#x2F;Mindstorms-Children-Computers-Powerfu...</a>
评论 #30672609 未加载
评论 #30673959 未加载
评论 #30672884 未加载
评论 #30674011 未加载
评论 #30673764 未加载
duxupabout 3 years ago
The title says &quot;Kids don&#x27;t need tools for kids&quot; but is this about kids or just the author?<p>Different people learn differently, if a tool or method doesn&#x27;t work for someone that&#x27;s on them to find another tool or method.<p>Scratch for example is great for visual learners who haven&#x27;t mastered what it is there to teach. It will work for some, not for others.<p>I’m always a bit wary of folks who just “get it” telling everyone about how they should or should not learn something. I remember a teacher who in my first programming class read from a book about C, and told us to now go complete a task. He wanted everyone to understand ALL the details for every line of code as we wrote it.<p>Took me 20 years before I seriously tried coding again.
npteljesabout 3 years ago
Why not have all kinds of tools? I began my career with a &quot;for kids&quot; software creator tool called Klik and Play[0] and I loved it. I also liked typing into the DOS console, creating simple games with batch files and the CHOICE command, but having a nice GUI to create graphical games was really fun and as it turned out, educational. I have no experience with Scratch, but looking at how widespread it is, and how people create projects to help learners transition from Scratch to other languages, I think it&#x27;s a fine starting point IF someone is interested in it.<p>[0] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;duckduckgo.com&#x2F;?t=ffcm&amp;q=Klik+And+Play&amp;iax=images&amp;ia=images" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;duckduckgo.com&#x2F;?t=ffcm&amp;q=Klik+And+Play&amp;iax=images&amp;ia...</a>
评论 #30675521 未加载
masters3dabout 3 years ago
I hope to teach my kids programming so I started with the older on learning algebra. I have been using the tablet app called dragonbox algebra (which is amazing!). The issue I am facing now is that my kid knows visually&#x2F;mechanically what to do in the app but they don’t understand why they have to do some things. We have been moving to the whiteboard so they have to translate swipes and taps to regular algebra notation. They literary think in terms of the app. What has helped a lot is to do a problem on the app then do the same problem on the board. Their eyes light up when they see the connection.<p>I think I will have the same translation dilema if I start with scratch. At some point we will need to get writing textual based code but I am not confident that I can get my kids exited about programming without graphical tools like scratch&#x2F;dragonbox.<p>In classroom setting most teachers could not teach the textual form of programming but something like scratch allows kids to explore and build the vocabulary to be able to translate to a textual representation.
评论 #30672240 未加载
评论 #30672247 未加载
评论 #30672135 未加载
评论 #30672228 未加载
评论 #30672150 未加载
评论 #30672262 未加载
Retr0idabout 3 years ago
To nitpick, the block code screenshot at the top of the post is not actually Scratch, it&#x27;s Snap![1] - which is essentially a superset of Scratch[2]<p>Scratch itself has no concept of &quot;custom reporters&quot; - i.e. functions that return a value. If you want a function to return something, the closest approximation is to assign the result to a global variable. But you can&#x27;t do recursion like that, so you&#x27;d need to use a &quot;List&quot; variable to emulate a stack.<p>If you wanted to write a recursive factorial function in &quot;pure&quot; Scratch, it would be significantly more convoluted than the one shown. Scratch cannot elegantly express the concept of recursion, so if you want to teach it, you probably shouldn&#x27;t be using Scratch to do so.<p>I suppose this means I agree with the author in general, but I do think that Scratch is great for teaching the concepts that it <i>can</i> express well - i.e. very basic imperative programming, with sprite-based graphics.<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;snap.berkeley.edu&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;snap.berkeley.edu&#x2F;</a><p>[2] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;cseducators.stackexchange.com&#x2F;questions&#x2F;112&#x2F;what-can-snap-do-that-scratch-cannot" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;cseducators.stackexchange.com&#x2F;questions&#x2F;112&#x2F;what-can...</a>
评论 #30672571 未加载
nicoburnsabout 3 years ago
As a kid I had a great time with Game Maker (now Game Maker Studio <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.yoyogames.com&#x2F;en&#x2F;showcase" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.yoyogames.com&#x2F;en&#x2F;showcase</a>). It&#x27;s great in that you can start with drag-and-drop game logic like &quot;When right arrow key is pressed, move characters right&quot; and simple 2d graphics, and then move on to a full programming language &quot;GML&quot; which is an ECMAScript (JavaScript) variant and full 3d if you want it. And it can compile for desktop &#x2F; mobile and web.
Steltekabout 3 years ago
While I agree that Scratch quickly runs out of gas as kids get older, I don&#x27;t think a Lisp shell is the next best step. The number of kids who are going to find recursion and math intrinsically fascinating is small. It seemed kind of obvious to me that something that runs in the browser is the best followup. Instant gratification, an absurdly powerful platform, and they can share it with their friends like they share anything else. If this language worked like ClojureScript, it&#x27;d have broader appeal.
评论 #30672535 未加载
评论 #30672438 未加载
评论 #30672309 未加载
评论 #30672633 未加载
评论 #30672365 未加载
评论 #30675888 未加载
CJeffersonabout 3 years ago
What&#x27;s great for kids, in my experience, is with scratch they can &quot;see things happening&quot;, making simple animations and games, and exploring. Also, scratch isn&#x27;t (to me) missing anything -- it&#x27;s a full programming language, the plugable blocks just ensure you build &quot;by AST&quot; instead of by text, which honestly is a feature I&#x27;ve heard language designers suggest we should move to (it would once and for all get rid of formatting questions if everyone could do AST -&gt; On-screen visualisation themselves).<p>With this language they can... implement functions like reverse, append and length by themselves?<p>I don&#x27;t mind people exploring options, but please don&#x27;t insult Scratch, then make up something for kids which (as far as I can tell) has never been shown to a kid.
scotty79about 3 years ago
I think the most inportant thing kids need is things to be discoverable.<p>So good, concise, contextual documentation with plenty of examples for anything kid touches.<p>So like Delphi F1 or PHP online docs.<p>Scratch doesn&#x27;t have anything like that I think.<p>Many tools for kids don&#x27;t give the kid ability to learn without direct adult instruction or watching long tutorial on something that&#x27;s not the thing the kid wants to do at the moment.
评论 #30672926 未加载
评论 #30672832 未加载
shadowgovtabout 3 years ago
Personally, I think tools should go the other way.<p>The beauty of scratch is that it makes most syntax errors impossible to construct in the tool and provides immediate feedback on how far away the program is from being an acceptable program. Only recently have the tools I use regularly as a professional started to adopt that approach.<p>How much time has our industry lost in change &#x2F; compile &#x2F; error &#x2F; change cycles? How much in typo-chasing because most languages are represented as strings, not things?<p>I think Scratch points the way to what professional tooling <i>could</i> be. It lacks polish, there&#x27;s a lot of accelerators that would need to be added before it could match the development speed of typing lines and lines of text... But there&#x27;s meat on those bones for an intrepid researcher to pursue.
gus_massaabout 3 years ago
This code is indented incorrectly:<p><pre><code> {{lambda {:a :b} bla bla bla :b :a bla bla bla} hello world} </code></pre> It should be:<p><pre><code> {{lambda {:a :b} bla bla bla :b :a bla bla bla} hello world}</code></pre>
评论 #30671826 未加载
erwincoumansabout 3 years ago
Our kids love Roblox and Minecraft. Its educational edition has Python 101, programming robots. Those are tools suitable for kids, but also fun for some grownups.
martyalainabout 3 years ago
This is not a statement, but a question. And yes, I love SCRATCH and I admire its creators. I&#x27;m just saying that there can be another way, just as accessible, with minimalist tools, including the one I use, but not only. I am interested in your opinion.
评论 #30672392 未加载
评论 #30672350 未加载
评论 #30672211 未加载
评论 #30672477 未加载
评论 #30672223 未加载
devmorabout 3 years ago
What exactly is the point the author is trying to make? From the title, I expected a coherent argument but what I&#x27;ve read therein sounds more like &quot;As an adult, I do not enjoy this thing meant for children.&quot; with little substance to why that matters to children.
评论 #30673109 未加载
评论 #30673584 未加载
评论 #30673873 未加载
评论 #30673974 未加载
评论 #30674506 未加载
评论 #30672385 未加载
评论 #30672331 未加载
ermirabout 3 years ago
As a child I got my hands on the StarCraft map editor, a reasonably complex tool that allowed me to create all sorts of scenarios. Similarly, an older cousin of mine had access to Worldcraft (now known as Valve Hammer) and Flash, all of these tools are complete in the sense that the end product is not a kid&#x27;s throwaway project but a complete experience, equal to official offerings.<p>Unfortunately such tools don&#x27;t really exist nowadays, maybe Roblox, but nothing outside of that.
评论 #30672250 未加载
评论 #30672935 未加载
pgcj_posterabout 3 years ago
I&#x27;ve taught kids both Scratch and JavaScript. I think Scratch is much better for pre-teens, for the following reasons:<p>- Scratch has an integrated 2d game engine, sprite editor, and asset library. This makes it easy for kids to make something of interest to them right away, including those who don&#x27;t pick up coding right away. I&#x27;ve had kids who struggled with complex coding but were still able to enjoy Scratch by making lightly-interactive stories &#x2F; art.<p>- Most children can drag blocks faster than they can type.<p>- Most kids these days aren&#x27;t familiar with a lot of desktop computing concepts we take for granted. For instance, they mostly don&#x27;t know what files are, or how to copy and paste text. It would be nice if I could teach them all of that before any coding -- but that&#x27;s generally not what they feel they&#x27;re there for.<p>- Scratch shows the current value of variables by default. This helps kids to grasp the concept of a variable and to understand why their program is behaving the way it is.<p>- Scratch is a website, which makes it easy for kids to show others what they did. This makes it more gratifying for kids and parents. IIRC, the Scratch team also found that this aspect is especially appealing to girls.
frashpikassabout 3 years ago
Thinking back at my childhood, I think I was lucky enough to have a father who could program Basic on a ZX Spectrum (which stated all the important keywords on its rubbery keycaps!), but not lucky enough to have a parent who knew how to answer questions such as &quot;How do you make a program on a computer from the &#x27;90s?&quot;.<p>Maybe, these were some things I lacked the most in my early training:<p>- Documentation: in the second half of the &#x27;90s the Web was too young to provide docs or even answers to my doubts. The open source community was confined to universities and there was little chance for my parents to know how to access a BBS.<p>- Tools that give a child agency without the need to read documentation: most things I could do as a child were because I either had clear examples of how to do them, or because the tools themselves used visual UX paradigms that any curious human could grow their skills by experimenting. Kids can devour technical manuals, but keep in mind that not all kids (nor their parents) speak English, and this can seriously limit their agency.<p>- Free (or even just accessible) professional tools to move on once I had mastered their watered-down for-kids cousins. Dad knew about interpreted programming languages, but had he known the word &quot;compiler&quot; (or &quot;synthesizer&quot; for that matter), I could have mastered them much earlier.<p>- More guidance. Curious kids can do anything, but if there&#x27;s someone leading the way or offering a benchmark, they can really bloom early. A young cousin of mine, displaying surprising sauvant traits, is lucky enough to have artsy and technical parents, and I can see how far he&#x27;s going!!<p>Speaking of the proposed language, I&#x27;m not sure kids would particularly like LISP like languages. But when I was a kid I wouldn&#x27;t have cared, had I known someone knowledgeable.
TheCycoONEabout 3 years ago
Perhaps the author would be better off saying some kids don&#x27;t need tools for kids. My son is 8, he has ADHD, he is also very into level design (Supertux) and making platformers in Scratch. Instant feedback and reward is important for him. There are or were adult tools that probably would have fit - Macromedia Flash comes to mind, but a Lisp without graphics would not fly.<p>Thinking back to my own early programming on the Commodore 64, the ability to make something flash or move or otherwise resemble a video game was very important to me as well. Some kids are interested in and motivated by math, but that hasn&#x27;t been my lived experience.
martyalainabout 3 years ago
I find it so sad that 99% of the comments are an entre soi between SCRATCH worshippers - of which I am one - and have no relation to the substance of my question. But what else could I expect, everyone stays in their own domain, me first, I guess. I like the presentation of the lambda-calculus made here <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;kids.kiddle.co&#x2F;Lambda_calculus" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;kids.kiddle.co&#x2F;Lambda_calculus</a>, which confirms me in the idea that the kids could find profit there, far from the certainties of the adults.
eternityforestabout 3 years ago
I would assume that kids need to learn similar stuff to what they will use in real life.<p>Scratch looks close enough to Python and JS but made visual that I&#x27;m not sure I see the issue. Is there not already a math class in school where people go to learn the low level information?<p>CS and programming are separate. If we don&#x27;t work in simple languages with clear axioms, then why not teach what people actually use?<p>Lambda calculus is probably a fantastic tool to really understand the deep fundamentals and theory though. But I&#x27;m not sure starting at a low level like that is the best.
troupeabout 3 years ago
The How to Design Programs with Racket seems to be a very good balance of letting kids work with picture and things that are visually rewarding while not insulating them from writing code.<p>Our family avoided Scratch for many of the same reasons the author gave. Instead we focused on typing and math and introduced programming when typing out all of your code wasn&#x27;t going to be frustrated by their typing speed.<p>How to Code: Simple Data with EdX is a very nice introduction to that approach of teaching programming.
empressplayabout 3 years ago
The author seems to have completely forgotten about Logo? Or BASIC for that matter? Some really complex programs have been written in either by adults as well as children...
tombertabout 3 years ago
For me, the &quot;sweet spot&quot; between &quot;tools for kids&quot; and &quot;real&quot; tools is Pico-8. It uses a &quot;real&quot; language (Lua), but the graphics interface is much easier to grok than mucking about with shaders and whatnot. To me, it doesn&#x27;t <i>feel</i> like a toy, it just feels like a simpler tool.<p>It&#x27;s the tool that I use whenever I try teaching kids to program.
TT-392about 3 years ago
So... unrelated to the actual contents of the article, but, that small column of justified text on a phone is a horrible reading experience on a phone (I couldn&#x27;t keep reading because of it). I have dyslexia, and I really wish it&#x27;d be more well known how hard text justification can make stuff to read.
disembiggenabout 3 years ago
I disagree fairly fundamentally with this, I&#x27;ve been a club teacher in primary schools, and scratch is such a good teaching tool for kids that to this day I marvel at it.<p>I want to evaluate lamdatalk against scratch on the principals on which scratch was built, low floor, high ceiling, wide walls:<p>Low Floor: I can show a child the program &quot;when space key pressed, Move 10 steps&quot; they&#x27;ll need to be able to read, and they&#x27;ll need to know what the &quot;space key&quot; is (they&#x27;ve been weaned on touch screens remember), and then they&#x27;ll understand it. further, they can then hit the space key and immediately see state change. They can use scratch on any computer they have access to at home from a browser.<p>Lambdatalk will also require them to know how to read, and I&#x27;ll need to explain what &quot;lambda&quot; means to a young child, and probably how to pronounce it. I&#x27;ll need to say what the arguments to a function are, and what &quot;argument&quot; means, and what way round they should go. I&#x27;ll need to explain to them why they should care, a moving character is immediately interesting to a child, this lambda has limited use to them. if they want to type it out I&#x27;ll need to show them how to type a curly bracket. They&#x27;ll need to download and run a program to use lambdatalk, on a PC they probably don&#x27;t own. (or use this inscrutable sandbox I guess? <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;lambdaway.free.fr&#x2F;lambdaspeech&#x2F;?view=sandbox" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;lambdaway.free.fr&#x2F;lambdaspeech&#x2F;?view=sandbox</a>)<p>High ceiling: There&#x27;s a lot you can do in scratch, people regularly post rudimentary raytracers or highly polished games on the scratch website. That said it has some limitations. It doesn&#x27;t interact with the web at large, it&#x27;s slow &amp; hard to do work in 3d, and impossible to match the likes of a real game engine, kids tend to want to graduate upwards after a while.<p>I was expecting to find http libraries or some impressive demos for high end lambdatalk, but I can&#x27;t see them, it may be more performant, but I can&#x27;t actually see the same level of demoscene work as exists in scratch. I wasn&#x27;t expecting to but I&#x27;ve got to give this one too, to scratch<p>Wide walls: Kids make games, animations, toys, mocked-up os&#x27;es, sounds, and conversation bots in scratch, there&#x27;s a lot to do with it<p>Lambdatalk just, doesn&#x27;t have so much? if a kid says they want to make something in scratch they often can, unless it&#x27;s 3d or requires wider internet access, lamdbatalk doesn&#x27;t seem to provide so much.<p>In conclusion, don&#x27;t rag on scratch for clicks, it&#x27;s an educators miracle, and when kids want to &quot;graduate&quot; up to more, they&#x27;re looking for more possibilities, not harder challenges, like html, or python libraries that let them interact with the web, or 3d engines that let them make the kinds of games they like to play. As an adult I think lambdatalk seems like a cool toy, and I&#x27;ll put some time into playing with it.<p>kids want to make the kinds of things they like to use.
评论 #30673750 未加载
wwilimabout 3 years ago
The author forgets (among other things) that he has the attention span of an above-average adult.