@jaloopa said in Stanford dumps Java as introductory class:
@the_quiet_one said in Stanford dumps Java as introductory class:
Introducing students to lists in general without distracting them with what generics are is a reasonable teaching approach
Maybe I've been doing this shit for too long, but I don't really see how it's all that confusing to say "with a list, you tell it what it's a list of. You then won't be able to insert anything that isn't that type or a subtype"
In and of itself it isn't, but when you're teaching students an intro where you have to assume they don't even know what a primitive is, much less other stuff like arrays in hour/1.5 hour chunks of time, there's just a lot of take in. Again, I'm talking about the first assignment, not the entire semester. It sounds like this teacher isn't even getting into generics in a 3-4 month class, about C#, which is horrible, but I don't mind generics being held for the middle of the semester after you've at least mastered the concept of classes and interfaces first.
Either way, not teaching it is one thing but explicitly saying you'll mark students down for learning about it themselves and implementing it seems like a to me
Agreed on that point. I've always hated teachers who punish students for going the extra step of doing stuff that isn't learned in class yet. If there's anything we need to do in programming class, it's encouraging them to learn stuff on their own.