Area 51 » Professional

201

followers

82 Example Questions (18 closed)

active newest votes

up vote 29 down vote

added by A Lin Nov 8 '15 at 17:34

This is a leading question, as I would answer the 2nd part how to introduce revision control with “not with git“, start with svn, then hg. – ctrl_alt_delor Jun 30 '16 at 21:39

up vote 17 down vote

added by vk2015 Nov 8 '15 at 13:53

This proposal is reportedly about the the techniques of teaching computer science (somewhat akin to our Language Learning site). While it is important for an educator to understand the subject matter, asking how or why a CS concept works should be asked on our Computer Science site. This proposal is about to undergo a final review so I am closing these questions to present the strongest possible case for launching a separate teaching site. – Robert Cartaino Jun 13 '16 at 14:25

up vote 17 down vote

added by A Lin Nov 8 '15 at 17:30

Why the 2x close votes? This strikes me as a great question. – Adam May 31 '16 at 23:16

Yes, and it could be improved even further by adding " vs a for loop". I personally have to think about it from time to time, even though I end up using for, for everything, even when I don't even need a counter, just out of sheer habits – Oak Jun 20 '16 at 1:56

up vote 14 down vote

added by ab_cstech, edited by AAM111 Sep 3 '16 at 3:34

I would challenge the "not constructive" closure of this question. As a CS Education researcher I can point to research papers with curriculum and tools appropriate for MS students. Other teachers will share resources, lessons, etc. Developers may argue language preference, but teachers will provide resources. – Leigh Ann Jan 6 '16 at 12:42

This is a relevant question because CS teachers get asked it. – TomOnTime Jan 11 '16 at 15:20

I cast a reopen vote on this one. If you have 150rep, please do so too as per @LeighAnn and @TomOnTime's comments. – AAM111 Jan 14 '16 at 22:26

I agree. This is a useful question, as a teacher will be asked that. – Elliot A. Jan 17 '16 at 14:01

This is begging for a flame war of personal opinions - especially with the opener: "I am personally a fan of Java, but...". It feels like a wiki question rather than an SO.com question - it can never be answered, it always changes, and it's hugely based on personal situation. Overall, not the kind of question we'd want? – Adam Jan 24 '16 at 1:14

show 6 more improvement suggestions

up vote 12 down vote

added by ab_cstech Nov 8 '15 at 19:15

Its not a good Q/A format question, maybe - but I feel this is an interesting area - embedded software seems to be widely ignored, let alone things made possible by changing technology. – Sean Houlihane Mar 23 '16 at 15:52

up vote 12 down vote

added by user145259, edited by wythagoras Aug 7 '16 at 19:29

	The best metaphor for recursion is recursion. – ctrl_alt_delor Jun 30 '16 at 21:49
	I edited this question from "What's your favorite metaphor to explain recursion with?" to "What metaphors can be used to explain recursion with?" to prevent it being an opinion based question – wythagoras Aug 7 '16 at 19:29

up vote 12 down vote

added by Peter Pogorski, edited by Kolappan Nathan Sep 17 '16 at 4:52

It's a good question. But... This question is EXTREMELY well-answered on existing stackoverflow sites; can we declare questions like this as forbidden? Otherwise we're duplicating (at lower quality) content that already exists. – Adam Dec 19 '15 at 12:15

A better question might be "How might I explain the differences between an Object Oriented and a Functional programming language to high schoolers?" – AAM111 Dec 31 '15 at 16:58

Is this part of a high school curriculum? I didn't understand the difference until I was 20 years in the industry. I'd like it to be in the curriculum, but I don't know how I'd cram it in if I was a HS teacher. – TomOnTime Jan 11 '16 at 15:20

In UK, it is now explicitly in the main exam-boards (e.g. AQA) for 16-18 year olds, with quite a lot of detail. So ... "yes, at least in England". – Adam Jan 11 '16 at 22:20

up vote 11 down vote

added by Ltww Nov 8 '15 at 14:12

closed as off topic by Zizouz212, Adam, Air, Robert Cartaino Jun 13 '16 at 14:39

This question does not relate to the topic of the proposal.

Downvoting: if you mean it literally, this question is VERY well-answred on stackoverflow already. If you mean it "for 13 year olds" or "for 18 year olds" etc ... then that needs to be specified. Otherwise it becomes a duplicate of the pre-existing questions – Adam Dec 19 '15 at 12:16

Shouldn't we just assume that all questions end with "...for 13 year olds"? – TomOnTime Jan 11 '16 at 15:22

@tomontime - no, because Google ranks SO sites very highly, which means it'll come up high on literal searches, attract wrong attention + answers. – Adam Jan 11 '16 at 22:21

@tomontime - Also ... do you mean "13 year olds" or "18 year olds"? The answers are so different as to be almost unrelated :). Are the 18 yr old answers different from the ageless answer? (I don't know - throwing this out there as why I'd want something more clearly aimed at educators - current wording is too BLAH) – Adam Jan 11 '16 at 22:22

@Adam - I just created a new discussion about this issue: Should the target group and further information be included in the question title? – elegent Jan 11 '16 at 23:29

show 5 more improvement suggestions

up vote 11 down vote

added by Choirbean Dec 4 '15 at 19:05

up vote 11 down vote

added by espertus Jan 3 '16 at 0:44

up vote 11 down vote

added by Peter Feb 19 '16 at 0:19

up vote 10 down vote

added by AAM111 Nov 8 '15 at 22:54

What is the "not constructive" closevote for? – AAM111 Dec 15 '15 at 17:21

@oldbunny2800 - Area51 sucks in several ways (very poorly designed); one is that we cannot vote to close with sensible reasons. I didn't vote on this one, but I've had to use "not constructive" on others where it's simply "Stupid Area51 is missing obvious Close reasons, and this is the nearest equivalent" – Adam Dec 19 '15 at 12:53

@Adam I see what you mean. – Elliot A. Jan 17 '16 at 14:02

Why was this closed? – AAM111 May 6 '16 at 20:27

@oldBunny2800 - on GDSE a question requesting links for resources on X are deemed not constructive because they are brittle & can often be answered via web search engine – Pikalek May 30 '16 at 3:28

up vote 10 down vote

added by user145259 Nov 10 '15 at 5:28

up vote 10 down vote

added by R.K. Nov 13 '15 at 23:00

closed as not a real question by TWhite, Zizouz212, Robert Cartaino Jun 13 '16 at 14:31

It's difficult to tell what is being asked here. This question is ambiguous, vague, incomplete, overly broad, or rhetorical and cannot be reasonably answered in its current form.

This question is extremely broad. It is better to ask about a very specific problem you are trying to overcome. Anything trying to cover "best way to teach computer science..." is essentially trying to encompass a large part of this scope in one question. This would be closed as too broad on an actual site. – Robert Cartaino Jun 13 '16 at 14:33

up vote 10 down vote

added by Sean Dec 21 '15 at 14:20

up vote 10 down vote

added by espertus Jan 3 '16 at 0:42

This is too broad. Which kind of course? Which backgrounds? – Raphael Jun 11 '16 at 8:35

Some students have taken programming courses in high school or elsewhere, while others have no experience with programming. – espertus Aug 7 '16 at 14:24

up vote 10 down vote

added by James Jan 15 '16 at 17:59

up vote 10 down vote

added by Pikalek May 30 '16 at 2:10

up vote 10 down vote

added by rcpinto Jun 2 '16 at 6:00

No but they are in the syllabus. Unless you are writing a program for a human. But first write it in a high level programming language. – ctrl_alt_delor Jun 30 '16 at 21:55

up vote 9 down vote

added by Ryan Nutt, edited by Robert Cartaino Jun 13 '16 at 15:01

up vote 9 down vote

added by Ryan Nutt Nov 15 '15 at 16:59

up vote 9 down vote

added by Miles Dec 17 '15 at 16:05

up vote 9 down vote

added by wythagoras Dec 17 '15 at 17:35

up vote 9 down vote

added by Adam Dec 19 '15 at 12:24

Misleading analogies like what? – AAM111 Jan 11 '16 at 21:41

Well, with young children, I've resorted to cardboard boxes, despite it being overwhelming frowned-upon. In practice, it was the breakthrough for many of them who'd spent weeks failing to grok variables. So ... without answering the question myself ... I feel its the kind of question worth asking on this new SO – Adam Jan 11 '16 at 22:19

In Abelson, H., Sussman, G. J., & Sussman, J. (1996). Structure and interpretation of computer programs. Justin Kelly. they get about ½ way through before introducing mutable variables. (variables that you can change the value of). Before this they had covered just about everything I have ever learnt (except variable mutation). – ctrl_alt_delor Jun 30 '16 at 21:47

@richared PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE read the top of the page. It is wrong and actively harmful to answer these questions here! – Adam Jul 1 '16 at 13:25

up vote 9 down vote

added by Sean Dec 21 '15 at 14:21

up vote 9 down vote

added by Sean Dec 21 '15 at 14:22

up vote 9 down vote

added by espertus Jan 3 '16 at 0:40

up vote 9 down vote

added by vk2015 Jan 3 '16 at 3:45

up vote 9 down vote

added by James Jan 16 '16 at 17:18

If this asks for quantifiable data, great. Anecdotes? Close as opinion based. – Raphael Jun 11 '16 at 8:36

up vote 9 down vote

added by Austin Henley Feb 27 '16 at 2:46

Very broad. Active learning is a whole research area! – Raphael Jun 11 '16 at 8:37

up vote 8 down vote

added by Keith MacDonald Nov 9 '15 at 0:32

<comments removed> @OldBunny2800 Please do not use comments to answer these questions. This proposal is not part of a Q&A site, and the task at hand is to help define what is on and off topic for a site. Comments are here to help improve the questions; not to answer them. See What is the rationale for deleting answers? Thank you. – Robert Cartaino Nov 18 '15 at 14:14

up vote 8 down vote

added by Eric Johnson, edited by Zizouz212 Jul 10 '16 at 23:49

Also register/gate level might be a more realistic point to consider. Not many people design gates, or work with spice models of computers. – Sean Houlihane Mar 23 '16 at 15:56