What I found irritating in the post is the premise that what we put in front of kids should be judged by counts of attributions to career success.
For a start, that's effectively the premise it's sold on. And for another thing, if it's not contributing to the kind of thinking that would help with that job, what is it other than another esoteric game?
Comments
For a start, that's effectively the premise it's sold on. And for another thing, if it's not contributing to the kind of thinking that would help with that job, what is it other than another esoteric game?
There are many things that no one will think to later attribute to “career success” that were in fact foundational to their learning and development.
In my experience it’s designed around a make/build/experiment pedagogical approach, not as a bootcamp system to get kids into programming careers