2 added 3 characters in body
source | link

To answer your question: my experience of using pseudocode is that it works perfectly well in combination with actual code. It would be like a photography teacher explaining the basis of composition by drawing instead of pointing at actual photos. As long as photos that use the rules are shown also, this is great.

Your experience raised a more important concern, one which I think that the other 1010 answers did not address. You said:

My experience has been mixed. It seems like the problem is that now the students think that the various algorithms are the java code.

Indeed. My experience of people has been that there are two kinds:

  1. Those who can generalize about a subject
  2. Those who can not (yet)

I had a student who thought he would be great at programming because he had done a lot of RPG2. His approach was to memorize everything - the book, my lectures, stuff he found on his own... Alas, his brain could not memorize everything. No one's can. We cannot function on the level of detail and master complex things, it is simply impossible.

So, your students who are trying to dig to China with a spoon need to learn to use larger concepts and tools. They need to do this by starting with small concepts and tools, and master them all as they go along. I don't know a single programmer who started out at a high level and never mastered the basics. It is impossible.

A program is nothing more than the coordinated operation of billions of transistors, possibly spread across machines linked by many technologies linkedconnected across large geographic areas. A mind is nothing more than the coordinated firing of trillions of nerve cells. But for us to understand, we need to be familiar with all of the levels. I think that this is beyond anyone, but what else do we have to occupy ourselves?

To answer your question: my experience of using pseudocode is that it works perfectly well in combination with actual code. It would be like a photography teacher explaining the basis of composition by drawing instead of pointing at actual photos. As long as photos that use the rules are shown also, this is great.

Your experience raised a more important concern, one which I think that the other 1010 answers did not address. You said:

My experience has been mixed. It seems like the problem is that now the students think that the various algorithms are the java code.

Indeed. My experience of people has been that there are two kinds:

  1. Those who can generalize about a subject
  2. Those who can not (yet)

I had a student who thought he would be great at programming because he had done a lot of RPG2. His approach was to memorize everything - the book, my lectures, stuff he found on his own... Alas, his brain could not memorize everything. No one's can. We cannot function on the level of detail and master complex things, it is simply impossible.

So, your students who are trying to dig to China with a spoon need to learn to use larger concepts and tools. They need to do this by starting with small concepts and tools, and master them all as they go along. I don't know a single programmer who started out at a high level and never mastered the basics. It is impossible.

A program is nothing more than the coordinated operation of billions of transistors, possibly spread across machines linked by many technologies linked across large geographic areas. A mind is nothing more than the coordinated firing of trillions of nerve cells. But for us to understand, we need to be familiar with all of the levels. I think that this is beyond anyone, but what else do we have to occupy ourselves?

To answer your question: my experience of using pseudocode is that it works perfectly well in combination with actual code. It would be like a photography teacher explaining the basis of composition by drawing instead of pointing at actual photos. As long as photos that use the rules are shown also, this is great.

Your experience raised a more important concern, one which I think that the other 1010 answers did not address. You said:

My experience has been mixed. It seems like the problem is that now the students think that the various algorithms are the java code.

Indeed. My experience of people has been that there are two kinds:

  1. Those who can generalize about a subject
  2. Those who can not (yet)

I had a student who thought he would be great at programming because he had done a lot of RPG2. His approach was to memorize everything - the book, my lectures, stuff he found on his own... Alas, his brain could not memorize everything. No one's can. We cannot function on the level of detail and master complex things, it is simply impossible.

So, your students who are trying to dig to China with a spoon need to learn to use larger concepts and tools. They need to do this by starting with small concepts and tools, and master them all as they go along. I don't know a single programmer who started out at a high level and never mastered the basics. It is impossible.

A program is nothing more than the coordinated operation of billions of transistors, possibly spread across machines linked by many technologies connected across large geographic areas. A mind is nothing more than the coordinated firing of trillions of nerve cells. But for us to understand, we need to be familiar with all of the levels. I think that this is beyond anyone, but what else do we have to occupy ourselves?

1
source | link

To answer your question: my experience of using pseudocode is that it works perfectly well in combination with actual code. It would be like a photography teacher explaining the basis of composition by drawing instead of pointing at actual photos. As long as photos that use the rules are shown also, this is great.

Your experience raised a more important concern, one which I think that the other 1010 answers did not address. You said:

My experience has been mixed. It seems like the problem is that now the students think that the various algorithms are the java code.

Indeed. My experience of people has been that there are two kinds:

  1. Those who can generalize about a subject
  2. Those who can not (yet)

I had a student who thought he would be great at programming because he had done a lot of RPG2. His approach was to memorize everything - the book, my lectures, stuff he found on his own... Alas, his brain could not memorize everything. No one's can. We cannot function on the level of detail and master complex things, it is simply impossible.

So, your students who are trying to dig to China with a spoon need to learn to use larger concepts and tools. They need to do this by starting with small concepts and tools, and master them all as they go along. I don't know a single programmer who started out at a high level and never mastered the basics. It is impossible.

A program is nothing more than the coordinated operation of billions of transistors, possibly spread across machines linked by many technologies linked across large geographic areas. A mind is nothing more than the coordinated firing of trillions of nerve cells. But for us to understand, we need to be familiar with all of the levels. I think that this is beyond anyone, but what else do we have to occupy ourselves?