Ben Hencke wrote:

>As ugly, malformed, and abused as basic is, I think it is the best
>language to teach to 5th graders.
>
>Java, smalltalk or any OO language is probably not the best place to
>start. The concepts that are required to make good OO programming is
>too complex and are in addition to the basic coding of the methods
>themselves. I think even C & derivatives are too complex in syntax,
>kids get buggy eyed with all the curly braces really easily.
>
>I have a 10 year old, and he seemed to pick up basic but I think
>anything more complex would be too tough especially to start with. I
>imagine teaching a room full of kids would be much more difficult.
>
>You gota remember that basic programming is still going to have a lot
>of concepts that are totally new to them (at least most of them).
>
>- Ben
>_______________________________________________
>http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
>View/change your membership options at
>http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
>
>  
>
Ben-
I hate to differ, but whereas you and I were trained with 
Basic/Fortran/C etc, Smalltalk and its OO basis is actually more 
friendly towards kids.  They learn to send messages to objects to get 
them to do their bidding.  There is a good video about this at 
http://www.squeakland.org/sqmedia/sqmediahome.html (clips at least) 
which won 4 Emmys. 

David

_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist