Likewise, my introduction to computer programming came in the form of StarLogo (a now wildly changed Logo derivative) in the 6th grade while the 2004 election was winding up. Despite the many years it's been since I've used Logo, this news has hit really hit me with sadness for the loss of a personal icon combined with a rush of nostalgic memories of creating graphics and silly games with Logo, along with the fundamentals and features of a programming environment, presented in a way that would keep me thinking about computer programming for the next 12 years (and I'm sure the next 20).
Many today trot out the Poignant Guide, "Learn You A ..." and related efforts as the future of computer education for young people.
I say give them Logo: I was taught by a schoolmarm with no particular programming background in a public school with 20 other kids. I myself didn't have a computer at home but Logo showed me what I was missing by inserting itself into the curriculum of the "new digital economy": driving kids who would have never used a computer to be programmers. The examples and challenges were fun, deep and made writing toy programs a joy.
To this day, Logo seems to crops where I least expect it: A clever t-refplace joke in the pioneering zine "Mondo 2000" (as well as ads for Terrapin), a Larry Wall interview and even my recent toy implementation of the inconvergent tree: http://zv.github.io/algorithmic-tree.html use knowledge I first learned on Logo.
Today, Seymour and Logo are titans, if only to me.
Books make you learn excercises. There is a place for them, but Logo lets you learn by doing, and by seeing. It doesn't try to teach you algorithms, and math, and optimization: That comes later. All logo tries to teach you is what programming is, and why it's fun.
Although, The Poignant Guide has a special place in my heart as well. It may not introduce programming amazingly well, or anything, but it managed to transcend the format of tutorial, and stands alone as a fascinating and entertaining read. I didn't care about the ruby: I wanted to know what would happen to the cartoon foxes, and if The Originals would be stopped.
After coming back from something involving a very weak course on programming (You know how they say that you can either teach what to think or how to think? this teaches neither, somehow.), it's wonderful to see in logo, scratch, the Guide, hell, even SICP, a willingness to teach not only how to think, but why it matters, and the joy it can bring (not that I'm suggesting we use SICP to bring in kids. shudders)
Between somebody who learned a bit of Logo, and maybe was given some excercises, and somebody who did the Hour of Code, one of them has a better understanding of what programming is about, and is more likely to see its appeal (hint: It's not the kid who did the HOC).
Many today trot out the Poignant Guide, "Learn You A ..." and related efforts as the future of computer education for young people.
I say give them Logo: I was taught by a schoolmarm with no particular programming background in a public school with 20 other kids. I myself didn't have a computer at home but Logo showed me what I was missing by inserting itself into the curriculum of the "new digital economy": driving kids who would have never used a computer to be programmers. The examples and challenges were fun, deep and made writing toy programs a joy.
To this day, Logo seems to crops where I least expect it: A clever t-refplace joke in the pioneering zine "Mondo 2000" (as well as ads for Terrapin), a Larry Wall interview and even my recent toy implementation of the inconvergent tree: http://zv.github.io/algorithmic-tree.html use knowledge I first learned on Logo.
Today, Seymour and Logo are titans, if only to me.
`crtdo` a new turtle in his memory.