John Zelle wrote: >no, No, NO. I never said this. At least I didn't intend to. Please see the top >of the message where I ask (virtually beg) for clarification on what you are >saying. I thought you were saying that it's OK to teach programming in a math >class, because it's being used there to motivate and illustrate mathematical >concepts. > no, No, No. ;)
I am trying to say that some integration of algorithmics into required math education is eminently sensible. Among other things is a statement that computer programming - in some sense of the word - *is* for everyone. Despite all my silliness and "freewheeling intelligence" there being so much noise around these issues - I try to make sure any position I might try to advocate passes some basic test against common sense. I am satisfied this position does. And because I am satisfied it does, I don't feel the need for banners of any kind, for armies or - I would have thought - for confrontations. So I have always been confused why such an idea would meet with *any* resistance on a list such as this. It has from day one. Which has always been a clue to me that I had in some sense entered Chinatown, in arriving here. No - it ain't the Media Lab. It is modest. It is unconnected with Revelation, New Ages, and Second Comings. It brings us to no new dimensions. It actually brings no new great amount of stature to the geeks of the world, or to the software industry. It must be on the right track. Art _______________________________________________ Edu-sig mailing list Edu-sig@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/edu-sig
